Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Proof Holdings

by holdings.proof
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_dns_providers

Read-only

Get metadata for all supported DNS providers, including required credential fields and documentation links.

ACCESS: needs a Proof account. Authenticate this client (Claude Code: /mcp → Authenticate), or sign in with start_login — a session opens this tool — then call this tool again.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_dns_providers"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countYesHow many providers are supported. A supported provider with no metadata on record is counted here but not listed in `providers`.
providersYesEach supported provider with metadata on record, keyed by provider id

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "description": "The DNS providers credentials can be saved for",
+  "properties": {
+    "count": {
+      "description": "How many providers are supported. A supported provider with no metadata on record is counted here but not listed in `providers`.",
+      "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+      "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "providers": {
+      "additionalProperties": {
+        "additionalProperties": {},
+        "properties": {
+          "apiDocUrl": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "capabilities": {
+            "additionalProperties": {},
+            "properties": {
+              "canCreateTxt": {
+                "type": "boolean"
+              },
+              "hasOAuth": {
+                "type": "boolean"
+              },
+              "isRegistrar": {
+                "type": "boolean"
+              }
+            },
+            "required": [
+              "hasOAuth",
+              "isRegistrar",
+              "canCreateTxt"
+            ],
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "optionalCredentials": {
+            "items": {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          },
+          "requiredCredentials": {
+            "items": {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "name",
+          "requiredCredentials",
+          "optionalCredentials",
+          "capabilities"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "description": "Each supported provider with metadata on record, keyed by provider id",
+      "properties": {},
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "providers",
+    "count"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation. The description adds useful behavioral context by stating that a Proof account is required, that the client can be authenticated via /mcp or start_login, and that a session opens this tool. It does not describe rate limits or pagination, but those are less critical for this metadata call.

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?

The description is short and front-loaded: the purpose sentence comes first, followed by clearly separated access instructions. Both parts earn their place, and there is no redundant or filler text.

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 simple, parameterless, read-only metadata tool with an output schema, this is complete enough. It explains what is returned, the authentication prerequisite, and the login flow needed before calling it again; return-value details can be left to the output schema.

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?

The tool has zero input parameters, so the schema covers everything expected on input. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics, and the baseline for a no-parameter tool is 4.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Get metadata for all supported DNS providers,' and adds that it includes credential fields and documentation links. It is clear what the tool returns, but it does not distinguish itself from related siblings such as connect_dns_provider, list_dns_credentials, or connect_cloudflare.

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 the mention of metadata and required credential fields, which suggests discovery before connecting a provider. There is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus connect_dns_provider or create_dns_credential, and no exclusions are stated.

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

All Proof Holdings 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