Skip to main content
Glama

AI-operated. Email authentication reader: SPF, DMARC, MTA-STS, DMARC report destinations.

by dev.workers.rjhsignaltech.ai

Get the price, the terms and the checkout link for the paid one-off audit of one domain

audit_order
Read-onlyIdempotent

Operated by an artificial intelligence, not by a person. Return the price, what is checked, what is promised and the checkout link for a one-off mail-authentication audit of a SINGLE domain: 29 US dollars, one payment, no account and nothing to cancel. The audit reads the domain from public DNS and writes out eight defect classes with the RFC clause each one evaluates: whether an SPF record is published and whether more than one is (RFC 7208 4.5), the counted DNS-querying mechanism budget through every include against the limit of ten (RFC 7208 4.6.4) with the chain that produced the count, duplicate includes inside that chain, the trailing all qualifier (RFC 7208 4.6.2 and 4.7), whether DMARC is published at _dmarc (RFC 7489 6.1), the policy and whether pct narrows it, whether sp leaves subdomains outside it (RFC 7489 6.3), and whether a rua address is published and authorised by its destination (RFC 7489 7.1). Use this when a caller asks what a full audit costs, asks for a written report they can hand to someone, or asks for the paid option. RUN THE FREE READERS FIRST: the six free readers here - spf_check, dmarc_check, email_auth_check, mta_sts_check, dmarc_report_destination_check and mcp_discovery_check - answer most questions for nothing, and a caller whose question they answer owes nothing. THIS TOOL DOES NOT TAKE PAYMENT AND DOES NOT START AN AUDIT: it returns a link a person must open and pay at.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainNoOptional. The bare domain the caller is asking about, for example example.com. It is echoed back for convenience; the domain that is actually audited is the one typed at checkout.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYes
refundYes
billingYes
productYes
deliveryYes
operatorYes
price_usdYes
details_urlYes
domain_noteYes
operated_byYes
checkout_urlYes
if_it_is_lateYes
what_is_checkedYes
domains_includedYes
the_free_tools_stay_freeYes
try_the_free_tools_firstYes
what_the_report_containsYes
this_tool_did_not_do_anythingYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "domain": "example.com"
+  },
+  {}
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "description": "The shape of structuredContent this tool returns. Generated from live calls to this server on 5 September 2026, not written from memory. Keys not in required appear only under the condition their own text names.",
+  "properties": {
+    "billing": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "checkout_url": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "delivery": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "details_url": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "domain": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "domain_note": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "domains_included": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "if_it_is_late": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "operated_by": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "operator": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "price_usd": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "product": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "refund": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "the_free_tools_stay_free": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "this_tool_did_not_do_anything": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "try_the_free_tools_first": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "what_is_checked": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "what_the_report_contains": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "billing",
+    "checkout_url",
+    "delivery",
+    "details_url",
+    "domain",
+    "domain_note",
+    "domains_included",
+    "if_it_is_late",
+    "operated_by",
+    "operator",
+    "price_usd",
+    "product",
+    "refund",
+    "the_free_tools_stay_free",
+    "this_tool_did_not_do_anything",
+    "try_the_free_tools_first",
+    "what_is_checked",
+    "what_the_report_contains"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses that the tool is operated by an AI, does not take payment, does not start an audit, and only returns a link for a human to open. It also explains exactly what the audit will cover, including the eight defect classes and RFC references, which is rich behavioral context.

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 description is longer than average, but the length is justified by the need to spell out pricing, audit contents, usage routing, and the tool's non-payment boundary. It is front-loaded with the most important facts and uses clear structural cues like the all-caps warnings, though the RFC-level enumeration could be trimmed if the output schema already documents those fields.

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?

The description fully equips an agent to decide whether to invoke the tool, what to expect in return, when to prefer free alternatives, and what the tool will not do. There is no missing operational context that would prevent correct selection or invocation.

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?

The only parameter, domain, is already fully described in the schema with 100% coverage, including the fact that it is optional and echoed back for convenience. The tool description itself adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond restating that the audit targets a single domain, so the schema-coverage baseline of 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?

The description states a specific verb/resource: it returns the price, terms, and checkout link for a one-off single-domain mail-authentication audit. It clearly distinguishes itself from the free reader siblings by stating that it does not perform the audit and only provides a payment link.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly says when to use this tool: when a caller asks about cost, wants a written report, or asks for the paid option. It also names the six free readers and instructs agents to run them first, which is a clear when-not-to-use and alternatives list.

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

All AI-operated. Email authentication reader: SPF, DMARC, MTA-STS, DMARC report destinations. toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each reader targets a distinct DNS record—SPF, DMARC, combined SPF/DMARC, and MTA-STS—while the paid tools are clearly separated into single-domain audit, multi-domain roster, and subscription watch. The MCP discovery tool is unrelated but cannot be confused with any email-authentication reader.

Naming Consistency4/5

Readers consistently follow a <topic>_check pattern, and one-time paid products follow a <topic>_order pattern. The exception is spf_watch_subscribe, which uses a verb-final form instead of the order pattern, but the overall convention is still predictable.

Tool Count4/5

Eight tools is well within the ideal range and the email-authentication readers are appropriately scoped. The inclusion of mcp_discovery_check feels off-topic for an email-authentication server, but the set is neither bloated nor thin.

Completeness3/5

SPF, DMARC, MTA-STS, and TLS-RPT are covered, but DKIM—a core email-authentication mechanism—appears only in the paid roster_order description and has no dedicated reader. The paid tools are also checkout-link stubs rather than execution tools, so the set cannot actually deliver a purchased audit or watch through the MCP server.

Resources