Ietf Datatracker

Rfc

rfc

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch IETF Datatracker metadata for an RFC by number (e.g. 9000); returns title, status, authors, publication date, and abstract.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`number`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`meta`	No
`objects`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 13, 2026
- changedOutput schema / properties / objects / items / properties / shepherd / type
```
Previous value: -"null"New value: +[
+  "null",
+  "string"
+]
```

Changed3 schema fields changedSep 22, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / meta

Added value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "limit": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "next": {
+      "type": "null"
+    },
+    "offset": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "previous": {
+      "type": "null"
+    },
+    "total_count": {
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / objects

Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "properties": {
+      "abstract": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "ad": {
+        "type": [
+          "string",
+          "null"
+        ]
+      },
+      "expires": {
+        "type": "null"
+      },
+      "external_url": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "group": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "id": {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "intended_std_level": {
+        "type": "null"
+      },
+      "keywords": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "name": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "note": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "notify": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "pages": {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "resource_uri": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "rev": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "rfc": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "rfc_number": {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "shepherd": {
+        "type": "null"
+      },
+      "states": {
+        "items": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "type": "array"
+      },
+      "std_level": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "stream": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "submissions": {
+        "items": {},
+        "type": "array"
+      },
+      "tags": {
+        "items": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "type": "array"
+      },
+      "time": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "title": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "uploaded_filename": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "words": {
+        "type": "number"
+      }
+    },
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

removedOutput schema / properties / results

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Array of matching documents",
-  "items": {
-    "properties": {
-      "abstract": {
-        "description": "Document abstract",
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "name": {
-        "description": "Document name",
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "pages": {
-        "description": "Number of pages",
-        "type": [
-          "number",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      },
-      "published": {
-        "description": "Publication date",
-        "type": [
-          "string",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      },
-      "rfc": {
-        "description": "RFC number if applicable",
-        "type": [
-          "number",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      },
-      "status": {
-        "description": "Document status",
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "title": {
-        "description": "Document title",
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "type": {
-        "description": "Document type",
-        "type": "string"
-      }
-    },
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  "type": "array"
-}

Changed2 schema fields changedMay 22, 2026

addedInput schema / examples

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "number": 9000
+  },
+  {
+    "number": 2616
+  }
+]

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "description": "RFC document response from IETF Datatracker API",
+  "properties": {
+    "results": {
+      "description": "Array of matching documents",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "abstract": {
+            "description": "Document abstract",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "description": "Document name",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "pages": {
+            "description": "Number of pages",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "published": {
+            "description": "Publication date",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "rfc": {
+            "description": "RFC number if applicable",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "status": {
+            "description": "Document status",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "title": {
+            "description": "Document title",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": {
+            "description": "Document type",
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedMay 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds the upstream source (IETF Datatracker) and the shape of what comes back, which is useful but modest; it says nothing about failure behavior for unknown RFC numbers or external-service limits.

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?

One front-loaded sentence containing the action, the source, the input with an example, and the return fields. Nothing is padded or repeated.

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?

An output schema exists, so listing title/status/authors/date/abstract is slightly redundant but harmless, and annotations cover the safety and idempotency profile. For a one-parameter lookup this is essentially sufficient; only error behavior for invalid numbers is unaddressed.

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 description coverage is 0% for the single 'number' parameter, so the description must carry the semantics, and it does: it names the input as an RFC number and supplies concrete example values (e.g. 9000), making the expected value domain clear. It stops short of stating bounds or whether historical/non-numeric RFC series identifiers are accepted.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Specific verb (Fetch) plus resource (IETF Datatracker metadata for an RFC) with a concrete example number and a list of returned fields, so the tool's job is unmistakable against generic siblings like document or company_facts. It does not explicitly route away from related lookups such as wg or wgs_search, so it stops short of 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the tool for retrieving a single RFC's metadata, but there is no statement of when it should be preferred over wg/wgs_search or any exclusion such as 'use wgs_search for working-group documents'. No prerequisites or context conditions are given.

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

All Ietf Datatracker 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.

Rfc

Input Schema

Output Schema

Schema Changelog

TDQS

Glama MCP Gateway

Resources