Skip to main content
Glama
1102tools-dev

ecfr-mcp

by 1102tools-dev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_version_history

Read-only

Get the version history of a CFR section, subpart, or part.

Instructions

Get the version history of a CFR section, subpart, or part.

Returns content_versions (each with date, amendment_date, issue_date, identifier, name, substantive and removed), every version eCFR lists: all of eCFR's pages are read, so Part 52's 2,264 versions are all there. Versions are grouped by section, oldest first.

since_date/until_date (YYYY-MM-DD) keep versions dated in that range. per_page (default 200, max 1000) and page step through long histories; total_count and total_pages say how many there are.

'substantive' is eCFR's flag: true when the version's text differs from the one before, including editorial edits such as citation fixes and the "Link to an amendment published at ..." notice eCFR adds when a rule is published; false when re-issued with no text change. To see what actually changed, use compare_versions on the dates.

'removed' true means the section was removed on that date.

Version metadata and text snapshots may include dates before 2017. Availability varies by title and section. Use the returned history dates for reads or comparisons; a missing old snapshot produces an availability error. A 2017-01-01 baseline often means unchanged since before 2017.

part/subpart/section accept int or string.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNo
partNo
sectionNo
subpartNo
per_pageNo
since_dateNo
until_dateNo
title_numberNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.0.33
    • addedInput schema / properties / page
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 1,
+  "title": "Page",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / per_page
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 200,
+  "title": "Per Page",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / since_date
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Since Date"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / until_date
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Until Date"
+}
  2. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.0.7
    • addedInput schema / properties / part / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "integer"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / section / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "integer"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / subpart / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "integer"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
  3. First observedv0.2.6

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/non-destructive, and the description adds real behavioral context beyond them: full read of every eCFR page (Part 52's 2,264 versions), versions grouped by section oldest-first, the meaning of the 'substantive' and 'removed' flags, pagination defaults, and the realistic failure mode (a missing old snapshot yields an availability error). This is unusually thorough disclosure for a read tool.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and return shape, then params, then semantics and caveats in short paragraphs. Dense and useful overall, though slightly long and mildly repetitive around the availability/2017-baseline caveat.

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?

Covers the hard parts an agent needs—the return shape, flag semantics, pagination, and the pre-2017 snapshot availability trap. Since an output schema exists it need not describe returns, and the only substantive omission is the undocumented title_number parameter.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must carry the params and mostly does: date formats for since_date/until_date, per_page default/max, page, and that part/subpart/section accept int or string. It never mentions title_number (default 48) nor whether part/subpart/section are mutually exclusive, leaving a gap in an otherwise strong pass.

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?

Opens with a precise verb+resource+scope: 'Get the version history of a CFR section, subpart, or part.' It also names the sibling to use instead for a related need (compare_versions), so an agent can place it among the 13 siblings without opening a schema.

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?

Clear routing advice: 'To see what actually changed, use compare_versions on the dates,' plus guidance on when since_date/until_date and pagination matter and when a 2017-01-01 baseline implies no change. No explicit when-not-to-use statement, but the conditions are well covered.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools