verified.fyi

Look up IP evidence

check_ip

Read-onlyIdempotent

Look up an IPv4 or IPv6 address's basics, network owner (ASN, name and country), blocklist status and IP profile URL. Detailed evidence, source dates and related websites are on the linked profile. Uses local data only; never connects to the address or queues a scan. Blocklist status currently covers Spamhaus ASN-DROP: listed, not_listed or not_assessed. It assesses the entire network, and absence does not prove safety. Accepts a bare IP address; use check_website for domains or URLs.

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": {
      "ip": "<ip>"
    },
    "name": "check_ip"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ip`	Yes	A bare IPv4 or IPv6 address, without a URL, port, CIDR prefix or zone identifier.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ip`	Yes	The canonical IPv4 or IPv6 address.
`scope`	Yes
`family`	Yes	IPv4 or IPv6.
`network`	No	Network owner; omitted if unavailable, unmatched or not applicable.
`report_url`	Yes	The full IP profile, including source dates and related websites.
`attribution`	Yes	Citation line for this data.
`blocklist_status`	Yes	listed, not_listed or not_assessed, from our local Spamhaus ASN-DROP snapshot. This checks the whole network; not_listed does not prove the IP is safe.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent/openWorld=false annotations, it discloses the data source ('local data only; never connects to the address or queues a scan') and the coverage limits of blocklist status (Spamhaus ASN-DROP only; whole-network assessment; absence does not prove safety). These caveats materially change how an agent should interpret a 'not_listed' result.

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 verb and outputs, then caveats, then the sibling routing rule — every sentence carries information. It is somewhat dense for a one-parameter lookup, but no sentence is filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be spelled out, and the description instead covers data provenance, blocklist limitations, and the correct alternative tool. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly or interpret the result is missing.

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 the single parameter's description already forbids URLs, ports, CIDR prefixes and zone identifiers, so the description's 'accepts a bare IP address' largely restates it. It adds routing value (domains go to check_website) but no new syntax or format detail. 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 ('look up') and resource ('IPv4 or IPv6 address') and enumerates the returned facts: basics, network owner/ASN, blocklist status, profile URL. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling check_website, so an agent can choose between them without opening either schema.

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?

Gives an explicit routing rule: 'Accepts a bare IP address; use check_website for domains or URLs,' naming the alternative and the condition that selects it. The note that details live on the linked profile further tells the agent when this tool is sufficient versus when to follow up.

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

All verified.fyi 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?