Versium REACH

Ip To Domain Append Mcp Tool

ip_to_domain_append

Read-onlyIdempotent

Discover business domains and firmographic information from IP addresses using Versium's IP-to-Domain API. Accepts an IPv4 address and returns up to 3 associated business domains with details like company name, address, industry, employee count, and revenue.

**Tips for Best Results:**
- Provide a valid IPv4 address for best results
- Useful for identifying businesses from web traffic or server information
- Returns comprehensive firmographic data similar to domain-based lookups

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ip`	Yes	IPv4 address to query for associated business domains.
`rcfg_max_time`	No	Maximum allowed API run time in seconds (optional).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`results`	No	Records returned by the Operations API. Record fields pass through unchanged.
`query_id`	No
`warnings`	No
`input_query`	No
`num_matches`	No	Number of matching queries.
`num_results`	No	Number of records returned.
`match_counts`	No	Sparse match counts. An absent key means zero.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds the output cardinality limit ('up to 3 associated business domains') and the range of returned firmographic attributes, which is useful beyond the annotations. It does not discuss edge cases like invalid IPs, but the schema pattern covers input format.

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 description is front-loaded with a clear one-sentence summary followed by a short tips section. The last bullet and IP-validity tip are somewhat redundant with earlier content, but the overall length is reasonable and scannable.

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?

For a simple 2-parameter lookup with a single required field, an output schema, and strong annotations, the description covers purpose, expected output, and practical use. It could be more complete by naming sibling alternatives or clearly scoping when not to use it, but nothing critical 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% and both parameters (ip and rcfg_max_time) already have meaningful descriptions. The tool description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the schema, matching the baseline for high schema coverage.

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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Discover') and resource ('business domains and firmographic information from IP addresses'), clearly distinguishing this from sibling append/list tools by the IP-to-domain lookup mechanism. It states the core action and result (up to 3 domains with firmographic details).

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 'Tips for Best Results' section gives clear use context: use for identifying businesses from web traffic or server information. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, so it falls just short of a 5.

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

All Versium REACH 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

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource and action: list generation (B2B vs B2C), enrichment (contact, demographic, firmographic, C2B, IP-to-domain), project/list management, job lifecycle, and validation. No two tools appear to do the same thing, so an agent can reliably select the correct one.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow the verb_noun pattern consistently, using verbs like list, show, create, preview, search, validate, append, and estimate. Even the segmented append tools (c2b_append, contact_append, demographic_append, firmographic_append, ip_to_domain_append) follow the same pattern with clear noun modifiers. No mixed conventions or vague verbs.

Tool Count4/5

With 19 tools, this is on the higher side but still well-scoped for a data enrichment and list-building platform. The count covers distinct functional areas (audience estimation, enrichment, job/project management, list inspection, documentation) without unnecessary bloat. It feels slightly heavy but each tool earns its place.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the core workflows: estimating audiences, creating and monitoring jobs, managing projects and lists, and enriching records with various data types. Minor gaps exist, such as no explicit delete/update operations for projects or lists, and no direct file download for list contents (though preview_list and show_list provide partial coverage). These are non-blocking gaps that agents can work around.

Resources

Need Help?