Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Epa Regulations

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Epa Regulation

epa_regulation
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the full text of one EPA regulation — a US Environmental Protection Agency rule codified in 40 CFR — by its citation. Returns the exact regulatory wording currently in force. Answers "what does 40 CFR 261 say", "what is the EPA regulation for X", "does the EPA require X", "read 40 CFR 60.1", "the RCRA hazardous waste rule", "the Clean Air Act / Clean Water Act regulation for X". Forgiving citation input: "261.4", "40 CFR 261.4", "§60.1", even "261.4(a)" (paragraph stripped to the section). Covers 40 CFR part 60 new source performance standards (emission standards / Clean Air Act), part 261 identification & listing of hazardous waste (RCRA), part 262 hazardous waste generators, part 122 NPDES permits (Clean Water Act), part 141 national primary drinking water regulations, part 63 NESHAP air toxics, TSCA parts (700s) toxic substances — the whole of Title 40 (air, water, waste, chemicals). This is EPA REGULATIONS (the rules/regulatory text); for EPA DATA (facility enforcement, ECHO compliance, GHG emissions) use the epa-echo / epa-emissions tools. Pass a whole part (e.g. "261" or "60") to get that part's section list. Example: epa_regulation({ citation: "261.4" }) -> exclusions from hazardous waste; epa_regulation({ citation: "40 CFR 60.1" }) -> applicability of emission standards. Keyless.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
citationYesEPA regulation citation. A section: "261.4", "40 CFR 261.4", "§60.1", "261.4(a)". Or a whole part: "261", "part 60" -> returns the part's section list.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "citation": "261.4"
+  },
+  {
+    "citation": "40 CFR 60.1"
+  }
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral details: returns currently in-force wording, forgiving citation input, and behavior for part vs. section queries. This goes beyond the annotations.

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?

The description is somewhat long but every sentence adds value: core purpose, examples, coverage, and disambiguation from sibling tools. It is front-loaded with the essential verb-resource pair. Could be slightly trimmed without loss, but remains efficient.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description fully explains what is returned (full text or section list) and provides concrete examples. It covers the entire scope of Title 40 regulations, making it complete for any agent.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% for the single required parameter 'citation'. The description enriches it with examples of valid formats, including paragraph stripping, and clarifies that passing a whole part yields a section list. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 it retrieves the full text of one EPA regulation by citation, listing examples like '40 CFR 261' and '§60.1'. It clearly distinguishes this regulation tool from data tools (epa-echo/epa-emissions), making its 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 Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly tells when to use (for regulation text) and when not to (for EPA data, pointing to alternative tools). Also clarifies input flexibility and that passing a whole part returns a section list, leaving no ambiguity about appropriate usage.

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

All Epa Regulations toolsInspect
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