epa-mcp-server

Get EPA Facility Compliance Profile

epa_echo_get_facility

Read-onlyIdempotent

ECHO: Retrieve a full compliance profile for a single EPA-regulated facility by EPA Registry ID. Returns facility metadata, ECHO's facility-level compliance status, a per-statute (CAA, CWA, RCRA, SDWA, and others ECHO tracks) compliance summary, the newest 100 inspections and other compliance monitoring records from the last five years, five years of formal enforcement actions with penalties, the latest TRI release total, and the facility's TRI facility IDs for epa_tri_get_facility_releases. Use epa_echo_search_facilities to discover Registry IDs. For area-level enforcement discovery use epa_echo_search_violations instead.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`registry_id`	Yes	EPA FRS Registry ID for the facility (obtained from epa_echo_search_facilities)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`zip`	No	ZIP code
`city`	No	City
`name`	No	Facility name
`error`	No	Present when the call failed. Absent on success.
`state`	No	2-letter state abbreviation
`county`	No	County name
`notice`	No	Present when ECHO's facility search request failed, so complianceStatus and compliance are missing; every other field comes from the facility's detailed report.
`street`	No	Street address
`fipsCode`	No	5-digit county FIPS code
`latitude`	No	Latitude in decimal degrees
`programs`	No	Program registration flags, from the ECHO systems in the facility's detailed report
`longitude`	No	Longitude in decimal degrees
`compliance`	No	Facility-level noncompliance count from ECHO's facility search record. Absent when ECHO reports none or the facility search request fails.
`registryId`	No	EPA FRS Registry ID
`inspections`	No	Inspections, evaluations, investigations, and other compliance monitoring records over the 5-year window, newest first; at most 100 (inspectionsTotal gives the full count)
`airCompliance`	No	Clean Air Act status. Present only when programs.air is true and ECHO reports a CAA status.
`formalActions`	No	Formal enforcement actions over the 5-year window, newest first
`triFacilityIds`	No	15-character TRI facility IDs recorded for this facility, most recently reported first — pass one as facility_id to epa_tri_get_facility_releases for per-chemical releases. A site can carry several from successive operators. Empty when the facility has no TRI record.
`waterCompliance`	No	Clean Water Act status. Present only when programs.water is true and ECHO reports a CWA status.
`complianceStatus`	No	ECHO's facility-level compliance status, the same value epa_echo_search_facilities returns (e.g. "Significant Violation"). Absent when ECHO assigns none, as for TRI-only facilities, or when ECHO's facility search request fails (the notice field then says so).
`inspectionsTotal`	No	Compliance monitoring records in ECHO's 5-year history for this facility; inspections lists the newest 100 when there are more
`programCompliance`	No	ECHO's per-statute enforcement and compliance summary. Empty when the facility is in no compliance-tracked program, as for TRI-only facilities.
`triReleasesTransfersYear`	No	TRI reporting year triReleasesTransfersInLbs covers
`triReleasesTransfersInLbs`	No	Total TRI on- and off-site releases and transfers in pounds for triReleasesTransfersYear, ECHO's latest TRI year for this facility. Absent when ECHO holds no TRI history for it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=true, idempotent=true, openWorld=true, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds substantive scope that annotations cannot: the newest 100 inspections, a five-year monitoring and enforcement window, and that penalties are included. It does not mention rate limits or auth requirements, which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

Purpose and the return-payload enumeration are front-loaded, then the routing sentences follow. The long middle sentence is dense but every clause names a distinct returned section; slightly over-enumerated given an output schema exists, but no waste.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values needn't be restated, yet the description's summary of the payload is still helpful for tool selection. Single-parameter tool with full schema coverage and a clear entry point; nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

The single registry_id parameter has 100% schema description coverage that already names it as an FRS Registry ID obtained from epa_echo_search_facilities. The description repeats the same sourcing hint and adds no format, validation, or 404-behavior detail, so the schema is doing the work.

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 ('Retrieve a full compliance profile for a single EPA-regulated facility') keyed to a named identifier, and enumerates the content of the payload. It is clearly differentiated from epa_echo_search_facilities and epa_echo_search_violations, which are named explicitly.

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?

Gives explicit routing: use epa_echo_search_facilities to discover Registry IDs, and use epa_echo_search_violations for area-level enforcement discovery instead. It also points to epa_tri_get_facility_releases for the TRI IDs it returns, so the when/when-not conditions are covered.

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

All epa-mcp-server 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.