Skip to main content
Glama

Fara

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Get Registrant Documents

get_registrant_documents
Read-onlyIdempotent

List FARA filings (PDF documents) for a registrant by registration_number (from search_registrants) — registration statements, supplemental statements, informational materials, exhibits, etc. Each row links the document to the specific foreign principal/country it concerns and gives a direct PDF URL. Optionally filter CLIENT-SIDE by document_type or country substring. Results are capped. Keyless.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax documents to return (default 50, hard cap 100).
countryNoOptional case-insensitive substring filter on the associated foreign-principal country.
document_typeNoOptional case-insensitive substring filter on document type, e.g. "supplemental", "exhibit", "informational".
registration_numberYesFARA registration number of the registrant (from search_registrants).

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds that results are capped, filters are client-side, and each row includes foreign principal details and a PDF URL, which are useful behavioral details 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is two sentences, front-loads the main action, and is generally concise. The term 'Keyless' is somewhat cryptic and could be clearer, but overall it is efficiently structured.

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?

Given the schema fully describes parameters and annotations provide key traits, the description covers output structure (foreign principal, PDF URL), limitations (capped), and filter behavior. It is complete for a read-only listing tool, though 'Keyless' is vague.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description reinforces the source of registration_number and mentions client-side filtering, but does not add significant new 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 clearly states it lists FARA filings for a registrant by registration_number, specifies document types (registration statements, supplemental, etc.), and references the sibling tool search_registrants, distinguishing its purpose.

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 indicates that registration_number comes from search_registrants, and mentions optional client-side filters by document_type or country. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance, but provides clear context for use.

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

All Fara 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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

There are several clusters of tools with overlapping purposes: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, and deep_research all do data-fetching/research with somewhat subtle differences. Polymarket tools also overlap (polymarket_arbitrage, polymarket_edges, polymarket_edge_tracker, polymarket_fill_risk, bet_research, polymarket_kalshi_spread). However, most tools have detailed descriptions that clarify their distinct roles, and the core data-lookup tools are differentiated by grounding level and scope.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a consistent verb_noun or noun_verb pattern (e.g., search_registrants, list_foreign_principals, get_registrant_documents, subscribe, unsubscribe, remember, recall, forget, resolve_entity, validate_claim). Deviations include brand-name tools like ask_pipeworx, pipeworx_feedback, pipeworx_trending, and polymarket_kalshi_spread that mix conventions but are still readable and predictable within their domain.

Tool Count2/5

34 tools is heavy for a single MCP server, especially with multiple overlapping research entry points (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, discover_tools, suggest_questions). The broad data-router nature of the server explains the size, but it is still a large surface that would be better consolidated.

Completeness4/5

The server covers its visible domains well: data lookup, grounded verification, entity profiling, comparison, change tracking, subscription lifecycle, memory, and FARA-specific queries. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct tool for updating saved memory beyond forgetting/re-remembering, no tool to create custom alert types beyond the three supported categories), but the core workflows are complete.

Resources