Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Emailchaser

by com.emailchaser
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get sender email DNS vitals

get_sender_email_dns
Read-only

Checks the sender domain's SPF, DKIM, DMARC and MX records and reports each as OK, WARNING, MISSING or ERROR with human-readable issues (the same checks behind the app's DNS vitals view), plus the mailbox's warm-up status: whether it is enrolled, today's ramp target, the daily cap and its healthScore (0-100, higher is better, the share of its warm-up emails over the last 7 full days that landed in the inbox rather than spam). Use it to diagnose deliverability. DNS lookups run live at request time, so the call can take a few seconds but never returns stale records.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "get_sender_email_dns"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe numeric sender email ID (from list_sender_emails)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/openWorld annotations, the description discloses that DNS lookups run live at request time, that the call may take a few seconds, and that results are never stale — exactly the latency and freshness facts an agent needs before calling. It also defines healthScore precisely (0-100, share of warm-up emails over the last 7 full days that landed in inbox rather than spam), removing ambiguity in the return values.

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?

The primary function is front-loaded in the first clause, followed by the warm-up payload, the use case, and the latency caveat in a logical order. It is dense and slightly run-on (one long multi-clause sentence), but nearly every clause carries information the agent cannot get from the schema or annotations.

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 return-value burden and does it well: it enumerates the four verdict states, mentions human-readable issues, and specifies each warm-up field. The main remaining gap is error/not-found behavior for an unknown sender id, but for a single-parameter read tool this is close to complete.

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% and the single `id` parameter is already documented in the schema as the numeric sender email ID sourced from list_sender_emails. The description adds nothing about the identifier — no format, range, or failure behavior for an invalid id — so the 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?

The description names the exact resources inspected (SPF, DKIM, DMARC, MX) and the verdict vocabulary (OK/WARNING/MISSING/ERROR), plus the secondary payload (warm-up enrollment, ramp target, daily cap, healthScore). That is a specific verb+resource statement an agent can act on. It does not explicitly contrast itself with nearby siblings such as get_sender_email_warmup or get_sender_reputation, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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?

"Use it to diagnose deliverability" is an implied when-to-use signal, but there are no exclusions or named alternatives. With siblings like get_deliverability_insights, get_sender_reputation and get_sender_email_warmup in the catalog, the agent is left to infer which of those to call for which diagnosis.

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

All Emailchaser 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