Skip to main content
Glama
azmartone67

DC Hub — Data Center & Energy Intelligence

Find Sites

find_sites
Read-onlyIdempotent

Find candidate search areas for data-center siting by state or coordinates, anchored on high-voltage substations with optional gas/fiber proximity filters. Get unranked starting points to analyze further when you need to know where to look.

Instructions

FRONT DOOR CHECK — if the question spans more than one capability ("find 200MW near Dallas with fiber, then rank the markets"), call execute_plan(intent="<the user's question, unchanged>"). find_sites is the right single call when the user has NO site yet and wants candidates to start from. THE INVERSE QUERY: every other DC Hub siting tool needs a coordinate you already have — analyze_site scores one, get_composite_site_score grades one, rank_sites orders candidates YOU already enriched, find_alternatives needs a seed facility. This one answers "where should I even be looking?". Returns candidate SEARCH AREAS anchored on real HIFLD substations at or above min_voltage_kv, spatially de-duplicated by cluster_km so a dense metro yields distinct areas instead of 40 near-identical rows, each carrying measured distance to the nearest gas pipeline and fiber route plus state-grain moratorium context, and a next_calls handoff. ★ WHAT A CANDIDATE IS NOT: a search area is NOT a parcel, NOT a listing, and NOT land known to be for sale — DC Hub holds no land-ownership or availability data, and hosted parcel boundaries cover ONE county (Loudoun VA), so analyze_parcel will 404 on most of these points BY DESIGN. Read each as "start looking here", then score the coordinate with analyze_site. ★ READ constraint_coverage BEFORE CALLING THIS A SCREENED LIST: a constraint filters ONLY when its layer actually answered. If a layer errors, the set comes back UNFILTERED with applied:false plus a reason and an instead, the names repeated in top-level unapplied_constraints and an unapplied_constraints_warning — an unevaluable constraint is never a passed constraint. fiber_distance_km is a straight-line CHORD between a route's endpoints, NOT the true polyline path; its basis is stamped on every candidate and get_fiber_readiness at the coordinate is the engineered read. hazard/moratorium are STATE grain, never a site verdict. A geography is REQUIRED — pass state, or lat+lon (+radius_km); without one you get a legible 400 (error_code geography_required), never a nationwide scan. Free tier coarsens coordinates to ~11 km and withholds operator/capacity. Answers "where should I even be looking for 200 MW in Ohio" and "which areas near Dallas sit on 230kV with gas within 5 miles". Try: find_sites state=OH min_voltage_kv=230 max_gas_km=8 — or find_sites lat=39.04 lon=-77.48 radius_km=60 min_voltage_kv=500. Do NOT use to score a site you already have (analyze_site), to rank candidates you already enriched (rank_sites), to find similar FACILITIES to a known one (find_alternatives), or for interconnection-queue survivors (get_refined_queue).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
latNoLatitude of a search centre, e.g. 39.04 — use with lon (+ radius_km) instead of state
lngNoAlias for lon — either name works
lonNoLongitude of a search centre, e.g. -77.48
limitNoMax results to return (1-500; default varies by tool)
stateNo2-letter US state to search, e.g. OH — required unless you pass lat + lon
latitudeNoAlias for lat — either name works
longitudeNoAlias for lon — either name works
radius_kmNoSearch radius in km around lat/lon (default 80, clamped 5-400); ignored in state mode
cluster_kmNoCollapse anchors within this many km into one candidate area (default 8, max 100). Raise it for broader coverage, lower it for denser results
max_gas_kmNoDrop candidates farther than this from the nearest gas pipeline. Applied ONLY if the gas layer answers — check constraint_coverage
max_fiber_kmNoDrop candidates farther than this from the nearest fiber route (CHORD approximation — see fiber_distance_basis). Applied ONLY if the fiber layer answers
min_voltage_kvNoOnly anchor on substations at or above this voltage in kV (default 115). 230+ for hyperscale, 500 for the largest campuses
exclude_moratoriumNotrue = drop candidates in a state with a published data-center moratorium. STATE grain, not jurisdiction grain

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
quotaNoCaller quota state (remaining calls, tier) when available.
_entityNoPayload class discriminator (e.g. facility|market|iso_grid|queue_results|deal|report|response) — branch on this before parsing the rest.
citationNoMachine-readable citation: how to attribute DC Hub (dchub.cloud) for this payload. Normally an OBJECT {source, url, license, cite_as, retrieved_at}; a bare string is accepted and carries the attribution line itself.
provenanceNoCollection-level provenance block: {source, method, as_of, verification_counts, cite_url_template, license, cite_as}. Quote the verification level when citing.
_front_doorNoIn-band front-door hint (first workflow-entry tool of a session): call plan_query(intent) first for the ordered multi-step plan.
_return_loopNoSuggested next-session delta call (get_changes since=24h) so you pull only what changed.
site_evaluation_handoffNoPre-built follow-up calls (analyze_site / get_water_risk args) when the payload carries coordinates — an array of {tool, parameters, why} entries.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv2.12.10

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Description discloses important behaviors: constraints apply only when layers answer, fiber distance is a chord approximation, moratorium is state-grain, free tier coarsens coordinates, and candidates may 404 on analyze_parcel by design. These are not visible in annotations and materially affect result interpretation. Annotations (readOnly, idempotent) are consistent with the described behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely long, repetitive, and uses heavy all-caps emphasis (e.g., 'FRONT DOOR CHECK', 'READ constraint_coverage', 'WHAT A CANDIDATE IS NOT'). While the content is valuable, it could be restructured into clearer sections and reduced by half without losing meaning.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Description covers all critical context: required geography, error behavior (geography_required), constraint-coverage semantics, fiber approximation, state-grain limitations, free-tier effects, and relationships to sibling tools. It also provides runnable examples, making it highly complete for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema already covers 100% of parameters with detailed descriptions (defaults, clamps, aliases, and conditional application). The description adds examples and reinforces caveats but does not significantly extend parameter semantics beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states the tool finds candidate search areas anchored on substations, answering 'where should I even be looking'. It explicitly distinguishes from siblings like analyze_site, rank_sites, and find_alternatives, making selection unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance with concrete examples (e.g., find_sites state=OH min_voltage_kv=230 max_gas_km=8). It also explains required geography and interaction with other tools, so an agent can confidently choose this tool over alternatives.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools