MoneyTools x402 agent toolkit

DNS propagation check

dns_propagation

Read-onlyIdempotent

Query 6 public resolvers (Cloudflare, Google, AdGuard, NextDNS, AliDNS, DNSPod) and compare answers: has my DNS change propagated? Free: 10 calls/day; then $0.002/call via x402 (MCP params._meta["x402/payment"] or HTTP) or X-API-Key credits. [served by tools.moneytools.dev]

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": {
      "domain": "<domain>"
    },
    "name": "dns_propagation"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`type`	No	A\|AAAA\|CNAME\|MX\|TXT\|NS\|CAA
`domain`	Yes	hostname

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive traits, so the description is free to add the genuinely non-obvious behavior: a free tier of 10 calls/day followed by $0.002/call, plus the two payment paths (x402 via params._meta, or X-API-Key credits). That cost/payment disclosure materially changes how an agent should plan calls; it does not, however, describe result semantics such as disagreement handling between resolvers.

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 purpose and the user question come first, followed by the commercial terms, which is the right ordering. The pricing/payment sentence is dense but each clause (free quota, per-call price, two payment channels, host attribution) carries information an agent needs before calling.

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 an output schema present, the definition need not explain return values, and annotations cover the safety profile, leaving the description responsible mainly for purpose and cost — both delivered. Minor gaps remain: no mention of behavior when a resolver times out or when answers conflict.

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 are documented in the schema, so the schema carries the semantics. The description adds only indirect meaning — that the resolver set is fixed at six, so no resolver-selection parameter exists — and gives no detail on 'type' values or defaulting.

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 (query + compare) and resource (6 named public resolvers) and frames the user question it answers: 'has my DNS change propagated?'. That framing clearly separates it from the neighboring dns_lookup-style tool, which would query a single resolver.

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 'has my DNS change propagated?' framing gives a clear situational trigger, and naming the six resolvers implies the cross-resolver comparison use case. It stops short of explicitly saying when to prefer dns_lookup instead, so the exclusion is left implicit.

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

All MoneyTools x402 agent toolkit tools Inspect

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

Need Help?