Govparse Government Data Gateway

faa_aircraft_search

Who owns which aircraft, and what did they just register? Search the FAA aircraft registry by registrant/owner, N-number, manufacturer, model, type_aircraft, type_registrant (1 individual/3 corp/7 LLC), state, city, status, fractional-only, or certificate-issue date (registered_since — new-ownership tell). Returns the aircraft (make/model/type/year/seats) and its entity-resolved registrant. FAA public-domain records. [price: $0.05/row]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`mfr`	No	Manufacturer name fragment.
`city`	No	Registrant city fragment.
`sort`	No	cert_issue_date \| last_action_date \| year_mfr :asc\|:desc. Default cert_issue_date:desc.
`limit`	No	Max rows (default 25, cap 100).
`model`	No	Model name fragment.
`since`	No	Last-action date on/after this date (YYYY-MM-DD).
`state`	No	Registrant state code(s), CSV.
`offset`	No	Rows to skip.
`status`	No	Registration status code(s), CSV (V = valid).
`n_number`	No	N-number(s), CSV (leading N optional).
`entity_id`	No	Resolved registrant entity UUID (pivots to business360).
`fractional`	No	true = fractional-ownership aircraft only.
`registrant`	No	Registrant/owner name — suffix/punctuation-insensitive.
`type_aircraft`	No	Type-aircraft code(s), CSV (4 fixed-wing single, 5 fixed-wing multi, 6 rotorcraft).
`type_registrant`	No	Registrant-type code(s), CSV (1 individual, 3 corporation, 7 LLC).
`registered_since`	No	Certificate-issue date on/after this date (YYYY-MM-DD) — new registrations/ownership.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

AddedJul 25, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the source (FAA public-domain records), pricing ($0.05/row), and return contents. However, it does not explicitly state the tool is read-only or mention rate limits. Given the search nature and public data, this is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 a single dense paragraph that packs a lot of information without waste. It front-loads the purpose. While slightly lengthy, every sentence adds value. It could be broken into bullets for clarity, but remains concise.

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 16 parameters with full schema coverage, no output schema, and no required params, the description explains what is returned (aircraft make/model/type/year/seats, registrant), sets expectations with pricing, and covers key search dimensions. It is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's output and use.

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 by explaining parameter codes (e.g., type_registrant: 1 individual, 3 corp, 7 LLC) and contextual hints (e.g., registered_since as 'new-ownership tell'). It enhances understanding beyond schema examples.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: searching the FAA aircraft registry by multiple criteria. It lists specific fields (owner, N-number, manufacturer, etc.) and states what is returned (aircraft details and registrant). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like faa_deregistrations_search.

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 implies usage for any FAA aircraft registry query, listing many search parameters and highlighting use cases like new registrations via 'registered_since'. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare with alternatives, but the context of sibling tools suggests differentiation.

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

All Govparse Government Data Gateway tools Inspect

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

A4.2/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct domain and specific action (e.g., FDA approvals vs clearances vs recalls; firmstanding business360 dossier vs search vs screen). Even overlapping concepts like 'business360' vs 'business360_lookup' are distinguished by input (UUID vs name+state). No two tools appear to do the same thing.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools use a consistent lowercase snake_case pattern with domain prefix (e.g., fda_*, firmstanding_*, fmcsa_*, govcon_*). Action words (search, lookup, screen, feed, stats) follow predictable usage. The naming is uniform and easy to parse.

Tool Count4/5

38 tools is on the higher end but appropriate for a comprehensive government data gateway spanning multiple agencies and datasets. Each domain has a reasonable number of tools (e.g., FMCSA: 7, OFLC: 6). Could potentially be trimmed slightly, but overall well-scoped for the stated purpose.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the major government data sources comprehensively: FDA (approvals, clearances, recalls), FMCSA (carrier census, safety, insurance, etc.), FSIS, DOJ/OFLC, OSHA/EPA/DOL enforcement, SEC insider filings, clinical trials, VA facilities/opportunities/vendors, and federal contracting. No obvious gaps for the stated gateway purpose.

Resources

Need Help?