Skip to main content
Glama

domainee

by dev.domainee
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Domain Connect Checker

tools_domain_connect_checker
Read-onlyIdempotent

Free public API. Check whether a domain's DNS provider implements the Domain Connect protocol, read live from the _domainconnect TXT record and the provider's settings endpoint. Reports the provider and whether it offers the synchronous flow (a signed redirect with no token exchanged, the one that works in practice) or only the asynchronous OAuth flow. Note that provider support is necessary but not sufficient for one-click setup: the service being connected must also have a template the provider has synced and enabled, which many providers do only after a per-service onboarding. No Bearer required.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesDomain to check, e.g. example.com.

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": "Whether the domain's DNS provider implements Domain Connect.",
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "properties": {
+        "discoveryHost": {
+          "description": "Host from the _domainconnect TXT record.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "dnsProvider": {
+          "type": [
+            "string",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        },
+        "domain": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "explanation": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "flows": {
+          "additionalProperties": true,
+          "description": "Present only when supported is true.",
+          "properties": {
+            "asynchronous": {
+              "description": "OAuth flow.",
+              "type": "boolean"
+            },
+            "synchronous": {
+              "description": "Signed-redirect flow; the one that works in practice.",
+              "type": "boolean"
+            }
+          },
+          "required": [
+            "synchronous",
+            "asynchronous"
+          ],
+          "type": "object"
+        },
+        "nameservers": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "providerId": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "reason": {
+          "description": "When unsupported: no_discovery_record | settings_unavailable.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "supported": {
+          "description": "Provider implements Domain Connect (necessary, not sufficient, for one-click setup).",
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        "urlControlPanel": {
+          "type": [
+            "string",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "domain",
+        "supported"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "description": "Always true here; failures return an isError result instead.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "ok",
+    "data"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: declares it is a free public API, that it reads live data from two specific endpoints, that no Bearer token is required, and it distinguishes the synchronous flow from the asynchronous OAuth flow and explains why that distinction matters in practice. This is meaningful behavioral context that readOnlyHint/idempotentHint alone could not convey.

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?

Four dense sentences with the key facts (free, public, no auth) front-loaded and no filler. Slightly longer than strictly necessary, but every clause carries information.

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, so return values need not be described; the description instead covers the source of truth, the auth model, and the caveat about template sync. For a one-parameter read-only checker, nothing an agent needs 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 the single 'domain' parameter is self-evident with an example in the schema. The description adds no syntax or format detail about the parameter, so it does not exceed the baseline for a fully documented schema.

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 and resource: checks whether a domain's DNS provider implements the Domain Connect protocol. It also names the data sources (_domainconnect TXT record and provider settings endpoint), which cleanly distinguishes it from siblings like tools_dns_provider_lookup and tools_txt_record_lookup.

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?

Explains the context in which the result matters — whether one-click setup is feasible — and explicitly warns that provider support is necessary but not sufficient. It does not name an alternative sibling tool to use instead, but the decision criteria are clear.

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