Domduck

Look up one domain

lookup_domain

Read-onlyIdempotent

Public reputation snapshot for one domain from Domduck's store: Domain Rating, Tranco rank, OpenPageRank, registration date, TLS certificate state and AI crawler policy. Returns hasReading false for a domain nobody has looked up yet, which is a real answer and not an error. One domain per call, and no history: the dated series is what a Domduck account is for.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`domain`	Yes	A domain name. Scheme, www and trailing dots are stripped.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint, it explains the non-error behavior of returning hasReading false for unknown domains and clarifies the lack of history. This adds meaningful behavioral context not present in annotations.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three focused sentences with front-loaded purpose, edge-case explanation, and limitation. No redundant words; every sentence adds unique value.

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?

For a single-parameter lookup tool with no output schema, the description lists the main returned fields, explains the edge-case return, and sets expectations for limitations. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand what to expect.

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 coverage is 100% and the description only reiterates 'one domain per call' without adding new parameter details. The schema already documents stripping behaviors, so the description does not add significant value beyond that.

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?

Description clearly states the tool provides a 'public reputation snapshot' for one domain, listing specific data points (Domain Rating, Tranco rank, etc.). It differentiates from siblings by emphasizing the full snapshot vs. just policy or list of sources.

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?

The description notes 'One domain per call, and no history', giving clear context on its limitations and when an account is needed for dated series. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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

All Domduck tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

The tools are mostly distinct: get_ai_crawler_policy focuses exclusively on crawler policy and llms.txt status, while lookup_domain provides a broader reputation snapshot that includes policy as one field. There is some overlap in that both can inform you about crawler policy, but the specialized detail of get_ai_crawler_policy (per-agent states, effective vs. written) clearly differentiates it. list_sources is a meta-tool that reduces guessing, so overall ambiguity is low.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a clean verb_noun pattern in snake_case: get_ai_crawler_policy, list_sources, lookup_domain. The verbs (get, list, lookup) are different but all are action verbs followed by a clear object, making the set predictable and easy to navigate. No mixing of casing or inconsistent conventions.

Tool Count5/5

With only 3 tools, the server is tightly scoped to its purpose: retrieving domain reputation and AI crawler policy data. Each tool serves a distinct function, and there is no bloat. This is well within the typical 3-15 range for a focused utility and feels intentional rather than thin.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the core read-only needs: a detailed policy lookup, a broad domain snapshot, and a meta-source listing. The only notable gap is that get_ai_crawler_policy reads a stored reading and does not fetch fresh robots.txt data, so agents cannot trigger an update. However, since this is a stored-data service and both get_ai_crawler_policy and lookup_domain handle missing data gracefully, the surface is reasonably complete for its stated purpose.

Resources

Need Help?