Skip to main content
Glama

Faa Regulations

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Faa Search

faa_search
Read-onlyIdempotent

Keyword search across the Federal Aviation Regulations — US FAA / aviation rules in 14 CFR. Answers "what FAA regulations cover X", "the aviation rule / FAR about X", "find the FAA regulation for X". Great for topics: right-of-way, VFR/IFR flight rules, minimum safe altitudes, drone / small unmanned aircraft operations, remote pilot certification, airline operating requirements, pilot certification and medical, aircraft airworthiness, maintenance and repair stations, airspace, TFRs. Returns matching Federal Aviation Regulations with citation (14 CFR / FAR), heading, excerpt, and source URL. Note: the CFR text uses "unmanned aircraft", not "drone" — search "unmanned aircraft night" for drone-at-night rules. Example: faa_search({ query: "unmanned aircraft night" }); faa_search({ query: "right-of-way rules", limit: 15 }). Keyless.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax results to return, 1-20 (default 10).
queryYesAviation-regulation topic or phrase, e.g. "right-of-way rules", "unmanned aircraft night", "minimum safe altitudes", "remote pilot certificate", "airline operating requirements".

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context: the terminology difference ('unmanned aircraft' vs 'drone') and the 'Keyless' note, which go beyond annotations.

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?

Every sentence adds value—purpose, typical queries, topic list, terminology note, and example invocations. Well-structured and front-loaded.

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 no output schema, the description appropriately states the return fields (citation, heading, excerpt, source URL). Covers all needed context for a simple two-parameter tool.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value with example queries and a terminology tip, improving clarity 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 clearly states the verb 'search' and the resource 'Federal Aviation Regulations', distinguishing it from the sibling 'faa_regulation' tool (which likely retrieves by citation).

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 gives explicit use cases like 'what FAA regulations cover X' and lists example topics, guiding when to use. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the guidance is clear.

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

All Faa Regulations 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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tools have unclear boundaries: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, and deep_research all route to the same 5,714-tool catalog with heavily overlapping purposes, and ask_pipeworx_beta is currently identical to ask_pipeworx. Similarly, bet_research, polymarket_arbitrage, polymarket_edges, polymarket_edge_tracker, and polymarket_fill_risk all target prediction-market analysis and could easily be confused by an agent. The two FAA tools (faa_regulation, faa_search) are distinct, but they are buried among a dozen unrelated data-lookup and memory tools.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a consistent lowercase snake_case verb_noun or noun_verb pattern (faa_search, resolve_entity, compare_entities, validate_claim, discover_tools, unsubscribe). Minor deviations exist, such as ask_pipeworx and pipeworx_feedback lacking underscores, and the polymarket_* family mixes noun-led names, but overall the naming is readable and predictable.

Tool Count1/5

33 tools for a server named 'Faa Regulations' is a severe mismatch: only 2 of the 33 tools (faa_regulation, faa_search) relate to FAA regulations, with the rest covering general data lookups, prediction markets, SEC filings, memory storage, npm dependency checking, and llms.txt generation. The count is far too high for the stated domain, and most tools do not belong in this server at all.

Completeness2/5

The actual FAA surface is thin: faa_search provides keyword lookup and faa_regulation returns full text or a part's section list, so basic citation-lookup workflows work, but there is no update/amendment tracking, no browse-by-part navigation beyond a section list, and no related aviation data such as NOTAMs or TFRs. The dominant Pipeworx tool family is unrelated to FAA regulations, so an agent using this server for its apparent purpose would hit dead ends quickly.

Resources