BlackVeil DNS & Email Security Scanner

check_authoritative_dns_infra

Read-onlyIdempotent

Measure a hostname's authoritative DNS posture by querying its nameservers directly over TCP/53 from one vantage: reachability, AA flag, recursion exposure, SOA serial consistency, DNSKEY/RRSIG presence (not validation), IPv4/IPv6 parity. Authenticated callers also get a zone-transfer refusal test (no zone data retrieved) and CHAOS disclosure. UDP, BGP, RPKI, anycast not measured.

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": "check_authoritative_dns_infra"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`domain`	Yes	Domain, e.g. example.com
`format`	No	Output verbosity.
`force_refresh`	No	Bypass the cache.

Output 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.

Changed3 schema fields changedNov 12, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / domain / description

Previous value: -"Domain to check (e.g., example.com)"New value: +"Domain, e.g. example.com"

changedInput schema / properties / force_refresh / description

Previous value: -"Bypass cache and run a fresh check. Useful after DNS changes."New value: +"Bypass the cache."

changedInput schema / properties / format / description

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

Changed1 schema field changedOct 25, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
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

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, yet the description still adds real value: the TCP/53 transport, the single-vantage limitation, and the important safety disclosure that the zone-transfer test only observes refusal and retrieves no zone data. The auth-gated extras (AXFR test, CHAOS disclosure) explain why results vary by caller, though it does not say what happens on unauthenticated calls or whether failures are reported per-signal.

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 highly economical, with no filler sentences. The signal list is delivered as one long semicolon-chained clause, which is dense enough to be harder to scan than a structured list and costs it a point.

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 and annotations cover the safety profile, so the description only needs to set scope and behavior, which it does: measured signals, non-measured dimensions, vantage limits, and auth-dependent differences. For a read-only diagnostic tool of this complexity, an agent has enough to decide when to call it and how to interpret the result.

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 domain, format, and force_refresh are already documented at the field level, and the schema's 'Bypass the cache' line is what reveals caching exists. The description adds only the implicit notion that some behaviors depend on caller authentication, not the semantics of any parameter. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the parameter load.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Measure a hostname's authoritative DNS posture') and enumerates exactly what is probed: reachability, AA flag, recursion exposure, SOA serial consistency, DNSKEY/RRSIG presence, IP parity. The closing negative list (UDP, BGP, RPKI, anycast not measured) draws a boundary against siblings such as check_ns, check_dnssec, and check_resolver_consistency.

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?

Scope is explicit: single vantage, TCP/53, direct to authoritative servers, and 'DNSKEY/RRSIG presence (not validation)' signals that validation belongs to a different tool like check_dnssec or check_dnssec_chain. It never names an alternative explicitly nor tells the agent which tool to pick when multiple vantages or validation are wanted, so the routing is left to inference.

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.