| name | andes |
| description | Progressive-disclosure workflow for ANDES dynamic studies. Use whenever the user wants to run ANDES through PowerMCP for power flow, small-signal / eigenvalue analysis, or time-domain simulation — even when they just say "check the damping", "is this stable", "run a fault", or "look at the oscillation modes". Exposes a solved base case before eigenvalue screening and time-domain runs. Reach for this instead of answering ANDES dynamics questions unaided. |
ANDES workflow
Expose ANDES tools in stages. Do not jump into dynamics until the base case is loaded, solved, and understood.
Default tool ladder
run_power_flow(file_path) to load the case and solve the steady-state point.get_system_info() to summarize buses, generators, dynamic states, and controls.run_eigenvalue_analysis(file_path) to screen oscillatory modes and poor damping.run_time_domain_simulation(step_size, t_end) only after the disturbance and success criteria are explicit.
Working rules
- Re-run the base power flow after any model or dispatch change before dynamic work.
- State the disturbance, clearing time, monitored channels, and pass or fail criteria before time-domain runs.
- Treat eigenvalue results as screening. Confirm critical cases in time domain.
Escalation triggers
Quote the failing metric (mode + damping ratio, channel + recovery time) rather than saying "it is unstable".
| Observation | Escalate to |
|---|
| Eigenvalue with damping ratio below ~5% or any right-half-plane mode | dynamic-stability-mitigation |
| Time-domain run shows growing angles, sustained oscillations, or failed voltage recovery | dynamic-stability-mitigation |
| Base power-flow voltages outside [0.95, 1.05] pu | voltage-violation-mitigation |
| Frequency nadir, RoCoF, or settling frequency violates its limit after a generation-loss event | frequency-response-mitigation |
Deliver
- The case used and whether the base case solved.
- The dynamic issue being checked.
- The main result and whether mitigation is now required.
