Fcc Ecfs

Ecfs Search Filings

ecfs_search_filings

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search FCC ECFS filings using the public API. Use filer to list filings submitted BY a specific company (exact name match); use query for full-text search across all filings. Returns filer/author, proceeding, submission type, dates, and official document links. Search matches are filings in the public record, not FCC findings or endorsements.

Example tool call

This call uses example arguments supplied in the tool’s input schema.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "filer": "T-Mobile USA, Inc.",
      "limit": 10
    },
    "name": "ecfs_search_filings"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`filer`	No	Filter to filings submitted BY this exact company or person name (e.g. "T-Mobile USA, Inc."). Use instead of query when searching for a specific filer's submissions.
`limit`	No	Results (1-100, default 25).
`query`	No	Full-text search across all ECFS filings — matches ANY mention of the term, not just filings BY that party.
`offset`	No	Pagination offset (default 0).
`_apiKey`	No	Optional api.data.gov key for higher limits; defaults to DEMO_KEY.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`source`	Yes
`filings`	Yes
`returned`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedAug 27, 2026

changedInput schema / examples

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "limit": 25,
-    "query": "T-Mobile"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "filer": "T-Mobile USA, Inc.",
+    "limit": 10
+  },
+  {
+    "filer": "AT&T",
+    "limit": 10,
+    "query": "5G spectrum"
+  }
+]

addedInput schema / properties / filer

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Filter to filings submitted BY this exact company or person name (e.g. \"T-Mobile USA, Inc.\"). Use instead of query when searching for a specific filer's submissions.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / query / description

Previous value: -"Full-text query, company, filer, author, or topic."New value: +"Full-text search across all ECFS filings — matches ANY mention of the term, not just filings BY that party."

removedInput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "query"
-]
```

First observedJul 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful context: it uses the public API, returns public-record filings, and explicitly cautions that results are not FCC findings or endorsements. No contradictions with 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?

Three focused sentences: what the tool does, how to choose between the two main parameters, and an important caveat. Every sentence earns its place, and key usage guidance is 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?

With a rich input schema, output schema, and safety annotations, the description covers the essential selection and invocation context. It explains return content, main parameter behavior, and the public-record caveat, leaving no major gap for an agent.

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 baseline is 3. The description reinforces the filer/query distinction and exact-name semantics, but it mostly paraphrases what the schema already documents rather than adding substantially new meaning.

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 ('Search FCC ECFS filings') and clearly distinguishes the two main search modes: filer-based exact-name lookup versus full-text query. This differentiates it from sibling tools like ecfs_search_proceedings and ecfs_filing_detail.

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?

Explicitly instructs when to use 'filer' versus 'query', which is practical and actionable. It does not name sibling alternatives or state when not to use the tool, but the parameter-level guidance is clear enough for most selection needs.

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

All Fcc Ecfs 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.