Agent Data API

domain_lookup

Everything about a domain in one call: DNS records (A, AAAA, NS, MX, TXT, CAA, CNAME), email security graded A-F (mail provider, SPF, DMARC policy, DKIM at common selectors, BIMI, with findings) and RDAP registration (registrar, created, expires, age in days, status, nameservers, DNSSEC). Repeat lookups list what changed since the previous check. Costs $0.003 USDC on Base via x402.

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_lookup"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`domain`	Yes	Domain, URL or email address (stripe.com)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the billing model and cost ($0.003 USDC on Base via x402), which is critical for an agent to know before calling. It also discloses statefulness (diffs against previous check) and grading semantics (A-F with findings). It misses failure behavior for invalid or unresolvable domains.

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-loaded with the payoff ('Everything about a domain in one call') followed by a dense but scannable enumeration of the three data families, then the cost. Tight, though the long clause with nested parentheticals is somewhat dense and foundings/list style could be clearer.

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 read-style one-param lookup with no output schema, the description covers all three output sections, the pricing/auth method (x402), and the delta behavior of repeat calls. An agent has everything needed to decide, pay, and interpret results.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema already documents that the single param accepts a domain, URL, or email. The description reinforces the scope (domain-level data) without adding contradicting syntax, and with 1 param at full coverage the baseline is well met; it adds only modest value beyond the 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+resource (domain lookup) and enumerates exactly what is returned: DNS record types, email security grading A-F, and RDAP registration fields. Clearly distinguishable from website_audit, website_tech_stack, and email_validate siblings.

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?

Implied usage is clear from the content lists, and the 'repeat lookups list what changed' note hints at when to re-run, but it never explicitly says when to use this versus website_history, email_validate, or website_audit.

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

All Agent Data API 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?