Skip to main content
Glama

Epa Echo

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Echo Enforcement Actions

echo_enforcement_actions
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve enforcement cases against a facility. Returns action type, penalty amounts, dates, and settlement details.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
registry_idYesEPA Registry ID (from echo_facility_search results).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
registry_idYesEPA Registry ID for the facility
enforcement_summaryYesEnforcement actions and penalty information

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / examples
      Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "registry_id": "110000350148"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "registry_id": "110037848498"
+  }
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "enforcement_summary": {
+      "description": "Enforcement actions and penalty information",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "registry_id": {
+      "description": "EPA Registry ID for the facility",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "registry_id",
+    "enforcement_summary"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "registry_id": "110000350148"
+  }
+]
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint) already declare safe behavior. Description adds value by listing specific returned fields (action type, penalty amounts, dates, settlement details), providing context beyond 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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with action, no superfluous words. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Output schema exists so return value explanation is unnecessary. Description covers purpose and data returned. For a simple read-only tool, this is nearly complete, though no pagination or limit details are mentioned.

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?

Only one parameter (registry_id) with 100% schema coverage. Description reuses 'facility' but adds no new semantic detail beyond what the schema ('EPA Registry ID') provides. Baseline score 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?

Clearly states verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'enforcement cases against a facility', with specific output fields. Distinguishes from sibling tools like echo_violations and echo_compliance_history by focusing on enforcement actions.

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?

Implies usage for retrieving enforcement cases for a facility via registry_id, but lacks explicit guidance on when to choose this over similar tools like echo_violations or echo_compliance_history. No direct mention of alternatives.

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

All Epa Echo toolsInspect
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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, and ask_pipeworx_grounded form a tight cluster, and the beta variant is explicitly identical to ask_pipeworx today. Several meta-tools like discover_tools, suggest_questions, and deep_research also overlap in discovery-oriented usage, so an agent must read carefully to pick the right one.

Naming Consistency3/5

Names are uniformly lowercase with underscores and mostly descriptive, but the conventions are mixed: verb_noun tools like validate_claim and list_subscriptions sit alongside noun_phrase tools like entity_profile and polymarket_arbitrage, plus bare verbs like remember and subscribe. It is readable but not a single predictable pattern.

Tool Count2/5

36 tools is well above the 25+ threshold, and the surface spans unrelated domains: EPA ECHO data, general Pipeworx research, Polymarket betting, memory, npm scanning, and AI visibility checks. For a server named 'Epa Echo', most tools feel out of scope and the collection seems like several separate servers merged together.

Completeness4/5

The EPA ECHO subset provides a solid facility-search, violations, compliance-history, and enforcement-action lifecycle. The broader Pipeworx surface also covers lookups, grounded answers, deep research, entity profiling, subscriptions, and memory, with only minor workaround-level gaps such as no dedicated ECHO permit/emissions detail tool.

Resources