BlackVeil DNS & Email Security Scanner

brand_audit_get_report

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch the result JSON of a completed brand audit: the per-target CheckResult when target is set, else the audit-level aggregate; returns notReady while in flight. When a PDF sidecar exists, metadata includes pdfUrl, an authenticated /reports/ download link (same bearer credential). Targets whose PDF is still rendering include pdfPending, so poll again.

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": {
      "auditId": "<auditId>"
    },
    "name": "brand_audit_get_report"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`format`	No	Output verbosity.
`target`	No	Specific target domain. Omit for audit-level aggregate.
`auditId`	Yes	Audit ID returned by brand_audit_batch_start.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 12, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / format / description

Previous value: -"Output verbosity. Auto-detected if omitted."New value: +"Output verbosity."

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 25, 2026

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

addedInput schema / properties / format

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Output verbosity. Auto-detected if omitted.",
+  "enum": [
+    "full",
+    "compact"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedOct 25, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": {},
-  "properties": {
-    "category": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "checkStatus": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "findings": {
-      "items": {
-        "additionalProperties": {},
-        "properties": {},
-        "type": "object"
-      },
-      "type": "array"
-    },
-    "partial": {
-      "type": "boolean"
-    },
-    "passed": {
-      "type": "boolean"
-    },
-    "score": {
-      "type": "number"
-    },
-    "verdictWithheld": {
-      "type": "boolean"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "category",
-    "score",
-    "passed",
-    "findings"
-  ],
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null

Changed1 schema field changedOct 5, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / verdictWithheld
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```
Changed2 schema fields changedAug 18, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / checkStatus
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / partial
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```

Changed1 schema field changedMay 26, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "category": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "findings": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": {},
+        "properties": {},
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "passed": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "score": {
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "category",
+    "score",
+    "passed",
+    "findings"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedMay 15, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safe-read profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive), and the description adds genuinely non-obvious behaviour on top: the notReady in-flight state, the pdfPending rendering state requiring another poll, and the fact that pdfUrl is an authenticated /reports/ link requiring the same bearer credential. It does not cover size limits or error behaviour for an invalid or expired auditId, which keeps it off a 5.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core fetch semantics, then sidecar/PDF behaviour. Dense semicolon packing and backticked identifiers make it slightly hard to scan, but nothing is redundant or filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing return values and does so reasonably: CheckResult shape, aggregate fallback, notReady, pdfUrl, and pdfPending. It is thin on the `format` parameter's effect and on failure modes, but an agent can call this correctly from what is given.

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 baseline is 3. The description does add real meaning by tying `target` to a change in return payload (per-target CheckResult versus audit-level aggregate), but it says nothing about the `format` enum's effect on output verbosity, so half the optional parameters remain unelaborated in prose.

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?

The description gives a specific verb and resource ("Fetch the result JSON of a completed brand audit") and explicitly branches the return shape on the `target` parameter, which is far more informative than a restated name. It does not name the sibling it complements (brand_audit_status) or state how they divide labour, so it stops just short of a 5.

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?

Clear conditional usage: set `target` for a per-target result, omit it for the audit-level aggregate, and poll again when the response is notReady or pdfPending. What is missing is guidance on when to use this tool versus polling brand_audit_status, which is a plausible source of agent confusion in this family.

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

All BlackVeil DNS & Email Security Scanner tools Inspect

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.