BlackVeil DNS & Email Security Scanner

check_authoritative_dns_infra

Read-onlyIdempotent

Measure authoritative DNS infrastructure posture for a hostname over direct DNS-over-TCP/53 from a single vantage: TCP/53 reachability, the authoritative AA flag, recursion exposure, SOA serial consistency across nameservers, DNSKEY/RRSIG presence (not validation), IPv4/IPv6 answer parity, and unsupported-query handling — plus, for authenticated callers, a zone-transfer refusal test (first response only, no zone data retrieved) and CHAOS version.bind/id.server disclosure. Reports UDP/53 reachability, amplification, EDNS large-response/truncation, DNS cookies/RRL, BGP origin, RPKI, route-leak signals, anycast diversity, vantage latency, and RIR/RDAP as inconclusive — none of those are measured. Uses BV_INFRA_PROBE when available.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`domain`	Yes	Domain to check (e.g., example.com)
`format`	No	Output verbosity. Auto-detected if omitted.
`force_refresh`	No	Bypass cache and run a fresh check. Useful after DNS changes.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`score`	Yes
`passed`	Yes
`partial`	No
`category`	Yes
`findings`	Yes
`checkStatus`	No
`verdictWithheld`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

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 changedJul 2, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / force_refresh

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Bypass cache and run a fresh check. Useful after DNS changes.",
+  "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 21, 2026
RemovedMay 20, 2026
AddedMay 20, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, non-destructive), and the description adds substantial context beyond them: authenticated callers get zone-transfer refusal and CHAOS version.bind tests, the ZT test is 'first response only, no zone data retrieved,' and it uses BV_INFRA_PROBE when available. This discloses auth gating and side-effect boundaries the annotations do not.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose is front-loaded, but the description is a single very long, em-dash-dense sentence followed by a lengthy enumeration of non-measured signals. The scope-negation list is useful for routing yet verbose; some items could be trimmed without loss. Appropriately sized in intent but structurally heavy.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, and annotations cover safety. The description still supplies full scope, auth-dependent behavior, probe fallback, and a clear boundary of what is not measured — nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is 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% with all three parameters documented, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema (e.g., it does not explain the full/compact format semantics or when force_refresh is worthwhile), so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (measure), resource (authoritative DNS infrastructure posture), scope (for a hostname, over direct DNS-over-TCP/53 from a single vantage), and enumerates the exact signals it covers. The explicit list of what it measures versus what it does not (UDP/53, amplification, BGP, RPKI, etc.) lets an agent separate it from siblings like check_ns and check_dnssec without opening a schema.

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?

The scope delineation implies when the tool is appropriate (authoritative-side posture, TCP/53-based checks), and the 'inconclusive' list helps rule it out for other needs. However, it never names an alternative tool or states an explicit condition for choosing this over check_ns, check_dnssec, or check_zone_hygiene. Usage is inferred rather than guided.

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.