Agent Data Tools: Compliance and checks

by dev.workers.revmesh2074.agent-data-tools

DNS lookup: records of a domain

dns_records

Read-only

DNS lookup of a domain: A, AAAA, MX, TXT, CNAME, NS, CAA, SOA and other records through Cloudflare DNS over HTTPS, with TTLs, the response code and DNSSEC validation. Use to check where a domain points, its mail servers or a TXT verification record. Example: name=example.com. Price $0.002/call via x402 USDC or a card key (/credits), first 25 free; failed calls free. Reads or computes only and changes nothing; each call is charged, so repeats are not free.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "dns_records"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	Domain name (or a URL; its host is used)
`type`	No	Record type: A, AAAA, CNAME, MX, NS, TXT, SOA, CAA, SRV, PTR, DS, DNSKEY, HTTPS (default A)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, open-world and non-destructive behavior, and the description adds genuinely new context: the upstream resolver (Cloudflare DoH), that DNSSEC validation and response codes are included, and that calls are billed per invocation with the first 25 free and failures free. The cost note also explains why repeats are not free, which reconciles the non-idempotent hint. It could still say more about rate limits or result completeness, so not 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

The capability is front-loaded, followed by use cases, example and pricing, which is a sensible order. The pricing sentence is somewhat dense and mildly redundant ('each call is charged, so repeats are not free' restates the per-call price), costing a point.

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 two-parameter lookup with no output schema, the description covers what is returned (TTLs, response code, DNSSEC validation), how to invoke it, upstream provider, and the billing model. An agent has everything needed to decide and call correctly.

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 coverage is 100% and both parameters are self-documenting, so the baseline applies. The description only adds a usage example for name and an open-ended 'other records' for type, which is marginal beyond the schema's explicit enumeration and stated A default.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('DNS lookup of a domain') and enumerates the concrete record types returned (A, AAAA, MX, TXT, CNAME, NS, CAA, SOA), so an agent knows exactly what it gets back. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling dns_lookup or dns_propagation tools, which keeps it below a 5.

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 concrete when-to-use conditions: checking where a domain points, finding mail servers, or verifying a TXT record, plus a worked example (name=example.com). It stops short of naming an alternative tool or stating when not to use it, despite plausible overlapping siblings.

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

All Agent Data Tools: Compliance and checks 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?