EnergyAtIt MCP Server

dispatch_command

Dispatch commands to energy assets such as batteries or HVAC to control charge, discharge, or load curtailment.

Instructions

Send a dispatch command to an asset (battery, HVAC, EV charger, etc.)

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "asset_id": "<asset_id>",
      "command": "<command>"
    },
    "name": "dispatch_command"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`asset_id`	Yes	Asset ID
`command`	Yes	Command: charge, discharge, reduce, curtail, shed_load, restore
`target_kw`	No	Target power in kW
`duration_minutes`	No	Duration in minutes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0May 29, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. It indicates a write operation ('Send') but fails to mention side effects, authorization needs, or what happens upon success/failure.

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?

Single sentence, no wasted words, front-loaded with action and resource.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Tool has 4 parameters (2 required), no output schema, no annotations. Description is minimal and does not cover return values, error handling, or edge cases.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, which already clearly describes each parameter.

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 uses a specific verb ('Send') and resource ('dispatch command to an asset'), and lists example asset types (battery, HVAC, EV charger), clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like 'dispatch_dr_event'.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'dispatch_dr_event' or 'dispatch_history'. No prerequisites or exclusions mentioned.

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