Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

BorealHost

by ai.borealhost
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

domain_settings

Update domain settings (auto-renew, WHOIS privacy, registrar lock).

Only provided (non-None) fields are updated.

Requires: API key with write scope.

Args: domain_name: Full domain name (e.g. "example.com") auto_renew: Optional bool enabling/disabling automatic renewal whois_privacy: Optional bool. False disables saved proxy service. Paid activation via True is refused; request an activation quote through Support. locked: Optional bool enabling/disabling registrar lock (prevents unauthorized transfers)

Returns: {"success": true, "domain": "example.com", "auto_renew": true, "whois_privacy": true, "locked": true}

Errors: NOT_FOUND: Domain not found or not owned by account

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": {
      "domain_name": "<domain_name>"
    },
    "name": "domain_settings"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
lockedNo
auto_renewNo
domain_nameYes
whois_privacyNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does so thoroughly. It discloses the partial-update behavior ('Only provided fields are updated'), the auth requirement, the whois_privacy activation refusal, the expected return payload, and a primary error case. This is exactly the kind of behavioral context an agent needs.

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 well-organized into Purpose, Behavior, Args, Returns, and Errors sections. It is front-loaded with the one-line summary, and every section earns its place by providing information not available in the schema or annotations.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, this description is complete. It covers the action, partial-update semantics, auth scope, parameter nuances, response shape, and an error case. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly and anticipate common failures.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must fully compensate. It does: every parameter is explained with meaning, types, and edge-case behavior, especially whois_privacy, which has a non-obvious activation restriction. The Args block adds real value beyond the bare schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Update domain settings', and then enumerates exactly which settings are affected (auto-renew, WHOIS privacy, registrar lock). This makes the tool's purpose unmistakable and clearly separates it from sibling tools like domain_detail, register_domain, and transfer_out_domain.

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 gives clear context for when to call it: when updating these specific domain settings, plus the write-scope auth requirement. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say 'use domain_detail for viewing settings', but the purpose statement is strong enough that an agent can infer the correct scenario.

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

All BorealHost toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources