Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-edf

mcp-edf

by mgcrea
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

EDF: Request

edf_request
Read-only

Fetch raw JSON from any Suivi Conso API path for the current home when dedicated tools lack a shaped response; supports GET paths and query parameters.

Instructions

Escape hatch: GET any Suivi Conso API path for this home, returning the raw JSON (cut at 60,000 characters). GET only; the same login and home headers as the other tools. Prefer the dedicated tools: their output is shaped, this one's is not. Paths seen in the Suivi Conso site include /v2/sites/-/elec-price-changes (beginTs, endTs), /v1/sites/-/billing-windows (fluids=ELEC,GAS), /v2/sites/-/elec-tariff-calendars (date=2026-11-11, a bare date), /v1/sites/-/usage-breakdowns (ts, fluid=ELEC|GAS), /v2/sites/-/forecast-consumptions (beginDate, endDate, fluid, strategy=ESTIMATION_AFTER_REAL). - stands for the current home. Some endpoints are v1 and others v2, and a wrong version answers 404.

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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "edf_request"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYesAPI path under https://suiviconso.edf.fr/api, e.g. /v2/sites/-/elec-tariff-calendars.
queryNoQuery parameters, e.g. {"date": "2026-11-11"}. Timestamps (beginTs, beginDate, ts) want an offset: 2026-11-01T00:00:00+01:00. v1 begin-date/end-date want 2026-11-01.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint; the description adds substantive behavior: GET-only, raw unshaped JSON, output truncated at 60,000 characters, and reuse of the same login/home headers as the other tools. The `-` placeholder semantics and the v1/v2 404 pitfall are useful operational detail, though truncation behavior at the boundary (what happens past 60k) isn't described.

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?

Front-loaded with the escape-hatch purpose, then alternatives, then examples, with no filler sentences. The endpoint list is dense and packed into one paragraph with parenthetical parameter hints, which is efficient but slightly harder to scan than a short list.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description covers the return shape (raw JSON, cut at 60,000 characters), the auth/header requirements, the path pattern, and version pitfalls. For a read-only open-world passthrough, nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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 already 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: what `-` stands for, that some endpoints are v1 and others v2, and per-endpoint query parameter shapes (fluids=ELEC,GAS, strategy=ESTIMATION_AFTER_REAL, bare date vs timestamp). It stops short of a systematic mapping of which endpoints take which parameters.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: "GET any Suivi Conso API path for this home, returning the raw JSON". The escape-hatch framing plus "Prefer the dedicated tools: their output is shaped, this one's is not" cleanly separates it from the shaped sibling tools.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: use dedicated tools first, fall back to this one for endpoints without a shaped tool. It lists concrete endpoint examples with their query parameters and warns that a wrong API version returns 404, which is exactly the guidance needed before choosing this tool.

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