DC Hub — Data Center & Energy Intelligence

Request Capacity Intro

request_capacity_intro

Request capacity introductions from data center providers by submitting a listing slug or standing requirement with location, size, and timeline. Provider accepts or declines before contact details are shared.

Instructions

Use when your human wants capacity behind a Capacity Source listing (pass slug), or wants first access to capacity matching a requirement as listings are onboarded (omit slug; pass capacity_mw or capacity_kw, markets, states, regions or countries, and timeline). This registers a deal: DC Hub records the request in its lead register and sends the provider ONLY your human's company name and the requirement. The provider accepts or declines. Only if the provider accepts does DC Hub share the provider's identity, site details and contact with your human, and your human's name, role and email with the provider; on a decline nothing is shared. Requires an identified caller (claim_free_key, then bind_email with your human's address) and accept_terms=true only after your human has read and agreed to the introduction terms at https://dchub.cloud/listings#terms. Returns lead_id, status and the next step. For a listing, source_capacity with its slug then shows the deal status in the disclosure block and, once the provider accepts, the provider's identity, site and contact. Do NOT use to save or monitor a site (use save_site / set_site_alert).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Your human's full name. Nothing is sent without it; use only what they gave you, never invent it
`role`	No	Your human's role or title
`slug`	No	The listing to register a deal for: its slug or id from source_capacity. Omit to register a standing requirement for upcoming listings instead
`notes`	No	Anything else the provider should know about the requirement. It travels with the requirement, so leave out anything that identifies your human
`states`	No	Comma-separated US states of interest, e.g. "TX, AZ"
`company`	No	Your human's company. Nothing is sent without it
`markets`	No	Comma-separated markets of interest, e.g. "Dallas, Phoenix"
`message`	No	A short note from your human for the provider. The deal registration itself carries only the company name and the requirement
`regions`	No	Comma-separated regions of interest from north_america, latin_america, europe, asia_pacific and middle_east_africa (aliases emea, apac, latam, americas), e.g. "europe, apac"
`timeline`	No	When the capacity is needed, e.g. a quarter and year
`use_case`	No	What the capacity is for, e.g. "AI inference"
`countries`	No	Comma-separated countries of interest, e.g. "Germany, Netherlands"
`capacity_kw`	No	Capacity needed, in kW (capacity_mw is the same requirement in MW)
`capacity_mw`	No	Capacity needed, in MW
`accept_terms`	No	Set true ONLY after your human has read and agreed to the introduction terms at https://dchub.cloud/listings#terms. Unless it is exactly true, nothing is sent
`terms_version`	No	The terms version your human agreed to, e.g. program.terms.version from source_capacity. Omit to send the version currently published

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`quota`	No	Caller quota state (remaining calls, tier) when available.
`_entity`	No	Payload class discriminator (e.g. facility\|market\|iso_grid\|queue_results\|deal\|report\|response) — branch on this before parsing the rest.
`citation`	No	Machine-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.
`provenance`	No	Collection-level provenance block: {source, method, as_of, verification_counts, cite_url_template, license, cite_as}. Quote the verification level when citing.
`_front_door`	No	In-band front-door hint (first workflow-entry tool of a session): call plan_query(intent) first for the ordered multi-step plan.
`_return_loop`	No	Suggested next-session delta call (get_changes since=24h) so you pull only what changed.
`site_evaluation_handoff`	No	Pre-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.

Changed6 schema fields changedv2.12.14Sep 16, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / capacity_kw

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Capacity needed, in kW (capacity_mw is the same requirement in MW)",
+  "type": "number"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / countries

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Comma-separated countries of interest, e.g. \"Germany, Netherlands\"",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / message / description

Previous value: -"A short note from your human to the operator"New value: +"A short note from your human for the provider. The deal registration itself carries only the company name and the requirement"

changedInput schema / properties / notes / description

Previous value: -"Anything else the operator should know about the requirement"New value: +"Anything else the provider should know about the requirement. It travels with the requirement, so leave out anything that identifies your human"

addedInput schema / properties / regions

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Comma-separated regions of interest from north_america, latin_america, europe, asia_pacific and middle_east_africa (aliases emea, apac, latam, americas), e.g. \"europe, apac\"",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / slug / description

Previous value: -"The listing to request an introduction for: its slug or id from source_capacity. Omit to register a standing requirement for upcoming listings instead"New value: +"The listing to register a deal for: its slug or id from source_capacity. Omit to register a standing requirement for upcoming listings instead"

Addedv2.12.13Sep 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description discloses the full workflow: the lead-register recording, that the provider receives only the company name and requirement, the accept/decline gating, that identities/contacts are shared only on acceptance, the identified-caller prerequisite, and the accept_terms requirement. Nothing material is hidden.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is long but every clause earns its place: trigger, two modes, deal mechanics, privacy constraints, prerequisites, return value, follow-up via source_capacity, and an explicit exclusion. It is front-loaded with the primary use condition, then flows logically through the deal lifecycle.

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?

For a 16-parameter, privacy-sensitive deal tool, the description leaves little to guess: it states the return value (lead_id, status, next step), the auth prerequisites, the terms behavior, the conditional sharing flow, and how to follow up via source_capacity. Combined with 100% schema coverage and the output schema, an agent can call and interpret this tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100% and each parameter already has a rich description, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds value by grouping the fields needed for the standing-requirement mode ('pass capacity_mw or capacity_kw, markets, states, regions or countries, and timeline') and by clarifying that the deal sends the provider only the company name and the requirement — context that shapes how name, company, notes, and message should be populated.

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?

The description opens with a specific trigger ('wants capacity behind a Capacity Source listing') and the standing-requirement alternative, then names the exact action ('registers a deal', 'records the request in its lead register'). It explicitly contrasts with save_site and set_site_alert, so an agent can distinguish it from siblings without inspecting their schemas.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives clear when-to-use context for both modes (slug vs omit slug) and an explicit when-not with named alternatives ('Do NOT use to save or monitor a site (use save_site / set_site_alert)'). However, it never contrasts its omit-slug standing-requirement mode with the sibling register_standing_intent, leaving that tool-selection decision to inference.

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

Deploy Server