Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

apibase

by io.github.whiteknightonhorse
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

EPA ECHO — Facility Violations & Enforcement

echo.compliance.violations
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve enforcement actions and violation history for a specific EPA-regulated facility. Returns enforcement activity type, action type, settlement date, federal and state penalties assessed, supplemental environmental project (SEP) amounts, and affected program codes (e.g. CAA, CWA, RCRA). Registry IDs are obtained from echo.compliance.facility_search results. Critical for environmental liability assessment, ESG due diligence, and compliance monitoring. Source: EPA ECHO — US Gov public domain, no auth required.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "registry_id": "<registry_id>"
    },
    "name": "echo.compliance.violations"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
registry_idYesEPA Facility Registry System (FRS) Registry ID to retrieve enforcement and violation history for (e.g. "110000350226"). Obtained from echo.facility_search results.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
errorNoPresent only when the call failed. Includes error code, message, request_id, and any provider-specific extras.
resultNoTool response payload. Shape varies per tool — consult the tool description and inputSchema. May be an object, array, string, or number depending on the upstream provider response.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Added
  4. Removed
  5. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly, idempotent, and destructive hints, so the safety profile is handled. The description adds value beyond annotations by disclosing that no auth is required, that the source is US Gov public domain, and by enumerating the return fields (enforcement activity type, settlement date, penalties, SEP amounts). It also reveals the dependency on a prior facility_search call.

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?

Four sentences, each carrying distinct information: the core action, return fields, ID source, and use-case/source/auth context. It is front-loaded with the purpose statement and avoids redundancy, though the 'Critical for...' clause is slightly promotional.

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 one-parameter tool with an output schema and annotations, the description is complete: it covers purpose, prerequisite, return content, source, and auth. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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%: registry_id has a description with an example and source. The tool description reinforces the source (facility_search) but adds no new format, syntax, or behavior details beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('enforcement actions and violation history for a specific EPA-regulated facility'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It distinguishes itself from siblings by naming the ID source (echo.compliance.facility_search) and listing unique data fields such as penalties, SEP amounts, and program codes.

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?

It explicitly tells the agent that Registry IDs come from echo.compliance.facility_search results, establishing a prerequisite and routing the agent to the correct sibling tool. It also names concrete use cases (environmental liability, ESG due diligence, compliance monitoring), which help an agent decide when to invoke it. It does not name exclusions versus facility_detail, but the guidance is sufficient.

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

All apibase toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources