devtools-mcp

Resolve Dns

resolve_dns

DNS 域名解析（DoH，JSON API）。输入域名 name（如 baidu.com、www.qq.com）和记录类型 type（A 默认/AAAA/CNAME/MX/TXT），返回解析记录列表（每条含 name、type、ttl、data；MX 数据为优先级+邮件交换主机，TXT 为文本记录）。数据源优先阿里 DoH（dns.alidns.com，国内快），失败自动兜底 Cloudflare DoH。域名不存在返回 NXDOMAIN 提示；域名存在但无该类型记录时返回空列表并附说明。网络 I/O 走线程池不阻塞事件循环。

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "resolve_dns"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	要解析的域名，如 "baidu.com"、"www.qq.com"（不含 http:// 和路径）
`type`	No	记录类型，"A"（默认，IPv4）/ "AAAA"（IPv6）/ "CNAME"（别名）/ "MX"（邮件交换）/ "TXT"（文本记录）	A

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed7 schema fields changedNov 9, 2026

addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```

addedInput schema / properties / name / description

Added value: +"要解析的域名，如 \"baidu.com\"、\"www.qq.com\"（不含 http:// 和路径）"

removedInput schema / properties / name / title
```
Removed value: -"Name"
```

addedInput schema / properties / type / description

Added value: +"记录类型，\"A\"（默认，IPv4）/ \"AAAA\"（IPv6）/\n  \"CNAME\"（别名）/ \"MX\"（邮件交换）/ \"TXT\"（文本记录）"

removedInput schema / properties / type / title
```
Removed value: -"Type"
```
removedInput schema / title
```
Removed value: -"resolve_dnsArguments"
```

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedSep 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the data sources (Ali DoH primary, Cloudflare DoH automatic fallback), the error semantics (NXDOMAIN vs. empty-list-with-note), and that network I/O runs on a thread pool without blocking the event loop. It still omits timeout, rate-limit, and any client-side caching behavior, which matters for repeated lookups.

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 the core purpose and input/output shape in the first two clauses, then errors and fallback. Some detail on per-record data layout (MX priority+host, TXT text) is redundant given a dedicated output schema, but the paragraph has no filler sentences.

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?

An output schema exists, so the return-value explanation is optional overlap rather than a gap. For a two-parameter read-only lookup tool, everything needed to invoke it correctly is present; only operational details like timeout and rate behavior are 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 schema already documents both parameters including the allowed record types and the A default. The description restates the same enumerations and examples with little added meaning, and it does not clarify behavior for edge cases such as specifying TXT without a subdomain prefix.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('DNS 域名解析（DoH，JSON API）'), names both inputs, and describes the return payload (name/type/ttl/data). The purpose is unmistakable and clearly distinct from the unrelated utility siblings such as convert_unit or generate_uuid.

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?

Gives concrete input examples ('baidu.com'、'www.qq.com') and, importantly, tells the agent how to interpret outcomes: NXDOMAIN prompt for non-existent domains versus an empty list with an explanation for missing record types. It does not state explicit exclusions or point to any alternative tool, but none of the listed siblings overlaps with this function.

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

All devtools-mcp tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.