Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

APIVerve

by com.apiverve
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

BIMI Record Validator

BIMIRecordValidator
Read-only

BIMI Record Validator: BIMI Validator checks if a domain has a valid BIMI record published in DNS. BIMI enables domain owners to display verified logos in supported email clients. (Cost: 10 credits)

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": "<domain>"
    },
    "name": "BIMIRecordValidator"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesThe domain to validate the BIMI record for

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNo
errorNoError message, null on success
statusNo"ok" on success

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful cost context (10 credits), but says nothing about what 'valid' means, whether DNS lookups can time out, or how failures are reported — though an output schema exists to cover results.

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 action, and the cost note is a useful trailing parenthetical. The lead-in 'BIMI Record Validator: BIMI Validator checks' redundantly restates the title, and the middle sentence about logo display is background rather than operational information, but nothing is seriously bloated.

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?

For a one-parameter read-only lookup with an output schema and safety annotations, the description covers purpose, scope and cost. The only real gap is the absence of any hint about prerequisites (DMARC) or what constitutes a valid record, which the output schema partially absorbs.

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, fully described in the schema (100% coverage) including an example value. The description adds no format constraints, normalization rules, or subdomain handling beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: checks whether a domain has a valid BIMI record published in DNS. The name and description are unambiguous, and BIMI is distinguished from sibling validators (DMARCValidator, DKIMValidator, SPFValidator) by the record type, though the description never explicitly contrasts them.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer it should call this when it needs to verify a domain's BIMI DNS record. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no routing to related validators such as DMARCValidator, which is a prerequisite concept for BIMI in practice.

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

All APIVerve 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