Skip to main content
Glama

domainee

by dev.domainee
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

DNS Provider Lookup

tools_dns_provider_lookup
Read-onlyIdempotent

Free public API. Identify which DNS provider actually serves a domain, fingerprinted from its public NS records. Returns the record name written the way that provider's form expects it (providers disagree about whether the apex is '@', blank, or the full domain, and getting it wrong is the most common way a correct record lands in the wrong place), whether the provider can point a zone apex at a hostname, where its record editor lives, and the provider-specific settings that silently break custom domain setups. Use this before telling someone what DNS record to add. No Bearer required.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesDomain or hostname. Subdomains are walked up to the zone holding the NS records.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYesAlways true here; failures return an isError result instead.
dataYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "description": "The DNS provider serving the domain and how to write records there.",
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "properties": {
+        "apex": {
+          "description": "true for a root domain.",
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        "detected": {
+          "description": "false = provider not recognised from its nameservers.",
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        "host": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "knownProviderCount": {
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        "nameservers": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "provider": {
+          "additionalProperties": true,
+          "properties": {
+            "apexSupport": {
+              "description": "'alias' = can point the apex at a hostname (ALIAS/ANAME/flattening); 'none' = apex needs A records.",
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "dashboardUrl": {
+              "type": [
+                "string",
+                "null"
+              ]
+            },
+            "id": {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "name": {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "quirks": {
+              "description": "Provider-specific settings that silently break custom domain setups.",
+              "items": {
+                "type": "string"
+              },
+              "type": "array"
+            },
+            "recordEditorPath": {
+              "description": "Where the DNS record editor lives in the provider's UI.",
+              "type": [
+                "string",
+                "null"
+              ]
+            },
+            "recordName": {
+              "description": "What to type in this provider's record name/host field for this hostname.",
+              "type": "string"
+            }
+          },
+          "required": [
+            "id",
+            "name",
+            "recordName",
+            "apexSupport",
+            "quirks"
+          ],
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "zone": {
+          "description": "Zone that holds the NS records.",
+          "type": [
+            "string",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "host",
+        "apex",
+        "nameservers",
+        "detected",
+        "provider"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "description": "Always true here; failures return an isError result instead.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "ok",
+    "data"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: the returned data's real-world significance (apex notation differences, apex-to-hostname support, editor location, provider-specific gotchas) plus a concrete auth note, 'No Bearer required.'

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-loads purpose and the key use instruction, and most sentences carry real information. The long parenthetical about apex notation is slightly run-on and could be tightened, but it is not padding.

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, single-purpose lookup with an output schema present, this covers everything needed: what it identifies, how, when to reach for it, and auth expectations. No critical gap remains.

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?

Only one parameter and schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents 'domain' including the subdomain walk-up behavior. The description adds no format or syntax guidance for the parameter, so the baseline of 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 (Identify) and resource (which DNS provider serves a domain), including the mechanism (fingerprinted from public NS records). This is clearly distinguishable from siblings like tools_dns_record_lookup or tools_cname_lookup, which resolve records rather than attribute them to a provider.

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?

Gives a concrete usage trigger: 'Use this before telling someone what DNS record to add.' That is a real contextual instruction. However, it never names or contrasts an alternative sibling for the case where the user just wants record values, so it stops short of explicit when-not guidance.

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

All domainee toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources