Skip to main content
Glama

federal-regulations-mcp-server

by io.github.cyanheads

regulations_get_docket

regulations_get_docket
Read-onlyIdempotent

Pull a rulemaking docket from Regulations.gov by docket ID (e.g. "EPA-HQ-OAR-2025-0194") — the docket's metadata (title, agency, RIN, abstract) and the documents filed in it (NPRM, final rule, supporting materials). The docket is the folder holding a rule's whole paper trail; each returned document's objectId feeds regulations_find_comments. A docket often contains hundreds of supporting materials — filter document_types to "Proposed Rule"/"Rule" to find the rule documents themselves. Requires REGULATIONS_GOV_API_KEY (free at https://api.data.gov/signup/); the Federal Register and eCFR tools work without it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoPage number (1-based). Regulations.gov caps a query at 20 pages (5,000 records); beyond that, narrow with document_types.
per_pageNoDocuments per page (5–250, default 25). Regulations.gov requires a minimum page size of 5.
docket_idYesRegulations.gov docket ID (e.g. "EPA-HQ-OAR-2025-0194"). Obtain from a Federal Register document's docketId (regulations_get_document) or an agency rulemaking reference.
document_typesNoFilter the docket's documents to these types. Omit for all. A docket often contains hundreds of "Supporting & Related Material" items — filter to "Proposed Rule"/"Rule" to find the rule documents.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rinNoRegulation Identifier Number ("Not Assigned" when none), or null.
errorNoPresent when the call failed. Absent on success.
shownNoDocuments returned on this page.
titleNoDocket title.
noticeNoGuidance when the docket has no documents.
abstractNoDocket abstract, or null.
agencyIdNoAgency ID (e.g. "EPA"), or null.
docketIdNoRegulations.gov docket ID.
objectIdNoDocket object ID, or null.
documentsNoDocuments filed in the docket (this page).
truncatedNoTrue when documentCount exceeds the returned set / 5,000 ceiling.
docketTypeNoDocket type (e.g. "Rulemaking"), or null.
modifyDateNoLast-modified date, or null.
documentCountNoTotal documents in the docket (before pagination).

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnly and idempotent behavior, which the description does not contradict. The description adds transparency about the API key requirement and the pagination constraints (max 20 pages, min page size 5), which are behavioral details not covered by annotations. It does not describe side effects (none exist) or the exact response structure, but that is covered by the output schema.

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?

The description is compact (three sentences) and front-loaded with the primary purpose. It efficiently conveys the key usage details (API key, filtering hint, relationship with other tools) without redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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?

Given the complexity (4 parameters, filtering, pagination, API key), the description covers all essential aspects: what the tool does, how to supply the ID, how to filter results, and a note on the API key. The output schema exists, so return values need not be described. It also situates the tool within the broader suite of sibling tools, enabling correct selection and usage.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

All four parameters have detailed descriptions in the schema, and the main description adds extra context: it explains how to obtain a docket_id, clarifies the purpose of the document_types filter, and provides a concrete example. This goes beyond the schema's parameter descriptions, fully conveying each parameter's meaning and use.

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 states a specific verb (Pull), resource (rulemaking docket from Regulations.gov), and scope (by docket ID). It also enumerates what is returned (metadata and documents) and clarifies how to identify the desired rule documents within the docket, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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?

The description explains when to use the tool (to fetch a docket with a valid ID) and provides guidance on filtering document types. It also notes the API key requirement and points to related tools (e.g., regulations_find_comments) via the objectId linkage, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools for when this one should not be used.

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

All federal-regulations-mcp-server toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: browsing vs searching, getting specific entities (CFR sections, dockets, documents) vs listing/finding comments. No overlap or ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow the consistent 'regulations_<verb>_<object>' pattern (e.g., browse_cfr, get_docket, list_open_comments), making it easy to predict functionality.

Tool Count5/5

Seven tools is well-scoped for a regulations domain, covering discovery (search, browse, list) and retrieval (get, find) without redundancy or bloat.

Completeness5/5

The set covers the core regulatory workflow: searching rules, browsing CFR structure, retrieving specific sections, dockets, documents, and comments. No obvious gaps for read-only access.

Resources