EnergyAtIt MCP Server

generate_compliance_package

Generate a compliance package for an energy site. Provide the site ID and optionally select a standard: IEC61850, ISO50001, or GHG_Scope2.

Instructions

Generate a compliance package for a site

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": {
      "site_id": "<site_id>"
    },
    "name": "generate_compliance_package"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`site_id`	Yes	Site ID
`standard`	No	Standard: IEC61850, ISO50001, GHG_Scope2

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0May 29, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits like idempotency, side effects, or processing time. It only states the action, leaving the agent unaware of mutability or other important behaviors.

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 a single, succinct sentence with no wasted words, achieving maximum conciseness.

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?

No output schema is provided, and the description does not indicate what the tool returns. Given the complexity of generating a compliance package and the existence of sibling tools like 'list_compliance_packages', the description is incomplete for effective use.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining what a compliance package is or how 'standard' affects output.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states it generates a compliance package for a site, with a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'generate_scope2_report', which might be similar in nature.

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 vs. alternatives, such as when a specific standard is needed or when to use 'list_compliance_packages' instead. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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