Regulatory Intel MCP

Search Documents

search_documents

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search the US Federal Register for regulations and notices. Filter by keyword, document type (rule, proposed_rule, notice, presidential_document), issuing agency (slug from the agencies tool), and publication date. Returns matching documents with title, type, agencies, abstract and links. Great for 'what did agency X publish about topic Y'.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`term`	No	Keyword(s) to search, e.g. 'artificial intelligence', 'PFAS'.
`type`	No	Restrict to one document type.
`since`	No	Only documents published on/after this date (YYYY-MM-DD).
`until`	No	Only documents published on/before this date (YYYY-MM-DD).
`agency`	No	Agency slug (from the 'agencies' tool), e.g. 'environmental-protection-agency'.
`per_page`	No	Results to return (default 10, max 30).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	No
`count`	No
`source`	No
`results`	No
`provenance`	No	Where this answer came from. served_at is when Datakoot answered (UTC); upstream lists the official sources consulted. Datakoot may serve a briefly cached copy, so the source's own observation can be older than served_at.
`total_pages`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 8, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / provenance

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Where this answer came from. served_at is when Datakoot answered (UTC); upstream lists the official sources consulted. Datakoot may serve a briefly cached copy, so the source's own observation can be older than served_at.",
+  "properties": {
+    "may_be_cached": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "publisher": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "served_at": {
+      "format": "date-time",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "upstream": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedOct 3, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "count": {},
+    "note": {},
+    "results": {},
+    "source": {},
+    "total_pages": {}
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 6, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, lowering the bar. The description adds the cross-tool dependency on 'agencies' for slugs and lists returned fields, but says nothing about ordering, pagination behavior beyond the schema's per_page, or total-count semantics, so the added behavioral value is modest.

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?

Three sentences, all front-loaded: purpose, filters, return shape, then a use-case hook. No sentence is filler and no critical detail is buried.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With an output schema present, the description needn't detail return values, yet it still summarizes them helpfully. For a 6-parameter, zero-required, filtered search tool with rich annotations, the main gap is guidance on result ordering and when to choose sibling tools.

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 each parameter (term, type enum, since/until, agency, per_page) is already documented with formats and examples. The description largely restates those same filters rather than adding syntax or edge-case meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 gives a specific verb (search) and resource (US Federal Register regulations and notices) plus the exact filter dimensions, so an agent can distinguish it from siblings like document, recent_documents, and executive_orders without opening a schema. The use-case framing ('what did agency X publish about topic Y') further pins down scope.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It states clear usage context and an example question, and cross-references the 'agencies' tool for obtaining a valid agency slug, which is real routing guidance. It stops short of naming when to prefer recent_documents or executive_orders instead, so it lacks explicit exclusions/alternatives.

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

All Regulatory Intel MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.