Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

WebLens

by dev.weblens
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

domain_intel

Domain intelligence in one call: RDAP registration (registrar, age, expiry, status), live DNS (A/AAAA/MX/NS/TXT), the mail and DNS providers behind them, the SaaS vendors the domain's TXT verification tokens reveal, SPF/DMARC posture, and risk signals like newly-registered or no-registrar-lock. Price: $0.005

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": "domain_intel"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesDomain to inspect, e.g. "stripe.com". A full URL is accepted and reduced to its hostname.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / domain / description
      Previous value: -"Domain to inspect, e.g. \"stripe.com\". A full URL is reduced to its hostname."New value: +"Domain to inspect, e.g. \"stripe.com\". A full URL is accepted and reduced to its hostname."
    • addedInput schema / properties / domain / example
      Added value: +"stripe.com"
    • addedInput schema / properties / domain / maxLength
      Added value: +253
    • addedInput schema / properties / domain / minLength
      Added value: +3
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden; it does disclose the exact data returned (registration fields, DNS record types, derived providers, risk signals) and notably the cost ('$0.005'), which is genuine behavioral context. It stops short of describing response format or any rate/limit behavior, keeping it from a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence that leads with the value proposition and then delivers a dense but all-relevant enumeration of outputs, closing with the price. Every clause earns its place; nothing is redundant.

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 must describe return values, and it does so thoroughly by listing each category of intelligence returned. It is nearly complete for a one-parameter read tool, though it omits any note on response structure or granularity.

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 parameter (domain) is already fully documented in the schema, including the URL-to-hostname normalization behavior. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 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+resource ('Domain intelligence in one call') and enumerates the exact data domains it returns: RDAP registration, live DNS, providers, SaaS vendors, SPF/DMARC posture, and risk signals. This lets an agent distinguish it from siblings like detect_tech or company_profile without opening a schema.

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?

Usage is only implied by 'in one call,' which suggests a comprehensive one-shot lookup, but the description never states when to prefer this over detect_tech, company_profile, or other siblings, nor any prerequisites. No explicit when/when-not or alternatives are given.

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

All WebLens 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