EnergyAtIt MCP Server

generate_scope2_report

Generate GHG Scope 2 compliance reports for facilities by specifying period and methodology to track indirect emissions from purchased energy.

Instructions

Generate GHG Scope 2 compliance report

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": {
      "facility_id": "<facility_id>",
      "period_start": "<period_start>",
      "period_end": "<period_end>"
    },
    "name": "generate_scope2_report"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`facility_id`	Yes	Facility UUID
`period_start`	Yes	Period start
`period_end`	Yes	Period end
`methodology`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0May 29, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'generate', implying a non-destructive read operation, but fails to mention required permissions, potential side effects, or output format. This is insufficient for an agent to invoke safely.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single sentence with no fluff, achieving conciseness. However, it is so minimal that it sacrifices completeness. Front-loading is adequate as the verb and resource are clear.

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?

Given the tool has 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what a compliance report entails, return structure, or dependencies like requiring historical data. Sibling tools like generate_compliance_package suggest broader context not addressed.

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 75%, with three parameters having basic descriptions. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. The 'methodology' enum lacks description, but its values are self-explanatory. No parameter-level guidance is provided.

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 GHG Scope 2 compliance report, specifying the scope and type of report. It distinguishes from siblings like generate_compliance_package by focusing on Scope 2, but lacks detail on what the report includes.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like generate_compliance_package. The description does not specify prerequisites, such as whether meter readings must exist, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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