SiteCheck Trade & Energy

Searches the US Export Administration Regulations text

logistics_export_license_ear99

Read-only

Searches the US Export Administration Regulations (15 CFR) text on eCFR for a term such as EAR99 or an ECCN, returning matching sections with a short excerpt, the part and the section. It shows regulatory text hits only; it does not decide the ECCN or licence requirement for a product. Related tools on this server, for a different need: logistics_usda_ag_export_sales when you need USDA weekly export sales report for a US farm commodity —. Price: $0.002 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

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": {
      "q": "<q>"
    },
    "name": "logistics_export_license_ear99"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`q`	Yes	Search term, 3 to 80 characters, e.g. EAR99 or 5A992
`limit`	No	1 to 10, default 5

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`hits`	No
`query`	No
`source`	No
`checkedAt`	No
`totalHits`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description adds substantive context beyond them: per-call pricing at $0.002 USDC via x402 on Base/Solana/Arc, with failed calls not charged. It also clarifies the output is excerpts only, not a determination. Return format detail is left to the output schema, which is appropriate.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The core purpose sentence is front-loaded and efficient, but the trailing 'Related tools on this server, for a different need: ... —.' is truncated and grammatically broken, and the pricing sentence is a dense run-on. Content is worth keeping but the structure needs cleanup.

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?

For a two-parameter read-only search with an output schema and annotations, the description covers purpose, scope limits, and the payment model an agent must know before calling. Nothing critical is missing, though it never mentions result ordering or what happens on zero hits.

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%, including the 3–80 character range and examples (EAR99, 5A992) plus the limit range and default. The description's 'a term such as EAR99 or an ECCN' merely echoes the schema and adds nothing about the limit parameter. 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?

States a specific verb and resource — search the US Export Administration Regulations (15 CFR) text on eCFR — plus the return shape (matching sections with excerpt, part, section). It also explicitly delimits scope by saying it does not decide ECCN or licence requirements, which separates it from classification/compliance siblings.

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?

Gives a clear exclusion ('shows regulatory text hits only; it does not decide the ECCN or licence requirement'), which tells an agent when not to use it. The named sibling, logistics_usda_ag_export_sales, addresses a genuinely different need rather than a true alternative for the same question, so routing guidance is present but only partially useful.

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

All SiteCheck Trade & Energy 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.

Resources

Need Help?