Apify Public Data & Leads

US Federal Register Rule and Notice Search

federal_register_search

Read-only

Find official US Federal Register rules, proposed rules, notices, and presidential documents. Use to track regulatory actions, discover comment periods, and research agency decisions.

Instructions

Search official US Federal Register rules, proposed rules, notices, and presidential documents. Returns agencies, publication and effective dates, abstracts, citations, CFR references, dockets, comment links, and source documents.

Behavioral Transparency:

Execution: Network call executed synchronously in the cloud via Apify Actor 'captainhandsome/federal-register-search'.
Side Effects: Creates a billed Actor run and dataset on your Apify account; queries the official Federal Register API.
Authentication: Requires APIFY_TOKEN; no Federal Register key is required.
Latency & Limits: Typical runs take 5-30 seconds; timeout capped at 120 seconds.

Usage Guidelines:

When to use: Use for rulemaking monitoring, regulatory research, agency-action tracking, comment-period discovery, and government-affairs workflows.
When NOT to use: Do not use as legal advice or assume a proposed rule is in force.
Named alternatives: Use 'courtlistener_case_search' for judicial decisions and dockets, 'sec_edgar_filings' for SEC company filings, or 'grants_gov_opportunity_search' for funding opportunities.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes	Free text across titles, abstracts, and indexed document content.
`sort_order`	No	Result ordering.	newest
`max_results`	No	Maximum documents returned and billed.
`document_types`	No	Federal Register document types to include.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`run`	No
`error`	No
`status`	Yes
`results`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.3.0Sep 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description goes well beyond them by disclosing synchronous cloud execution via a specific Apify Actor, billing side effects (billed Actor run and dataset), authentication requirements (APIFY_TOKEN), and latency limits. This gives the agent material operational context without contradicting the 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?

The description is organized into clear sections with front-loaded purpose and concise bullets for execution, side effects, authentication, latency, and usage guidance. Each section adds non-redundant, decision-relevant information, and no sentence feels wasted.

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 tool with 4 parameters, a rich output schema, and annotations, the description is complete: it covers the data source, return content, execution behavior, billing side effects, auth, latency, and use cases. Nothing critical an agent needs to decide or invoke the tool 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%, so the input schema fully documents query, sort_order, max_results, and document_types. The description adds high-level context about returned fields and billing implications of max_results, but it does not meaningfully explain individual parameter meanings beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 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 ('Search') plus a precise resource ('official US Federal Register rules, proposed rules, notices, and presidential documents'), and enumerates the returned content types. This clearly distinguishes it from the judicial, SEC, and grants-focused siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly provides when-to-use scenarios ('rulemaking monitoring, regulatory research, agency-action tracking...'), a when-not-to-use caveat (not legal advice, don't assume a proposed rule is in force), and names alternative tools like courtlistener_case_search and sec_edgar_filings. This fully addresses selection guidance.

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

Deploy Server