site_status_checkCheck whether a site is reachable from Cloudflare's network. Returns an up/down boolean, HTTP status code, response time in milliseconds, and the server / content-type headers. Use it to confirm an outage is real rather than local, or to verify a deployment is serving.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | URL or bare domain to check, e.g. example.com or https://example.com/health |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the check is from Cloudflare's network (not local), lists the return fields (up/down boolean, HTTP status, response time, headers), and implies a read-only, non-destructive operation. This is substantial 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two sentences: the first states the action and return values, the second gives use cases. Every sentence earns its place; no jargon or redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
This is a simple tool with one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations. The description fully covers what the tool does, what it returns, and when to use it. It is complete for the given complexity.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% (the single 'url' parameter is fully described). The description does not add parameter-specific details beyond the schema, but the schema already provides sufficient meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool checks site reachability from Cloudflare's network, with a specific verb ('Check'), resource ('site'), and scope. It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on up/down status and HTTP-level details, which no other listed tool directly covers.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicit use cases are provided: confirming an outage is real versus local, and verifying a deployment is serving. It does not name alternative tools, but the guidance is clear enough for an agent to know when to invoke this tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action. IP lookup, ASN, reverse DNS, blacklist, and VPN/proxy checks are clearly differentiated. Even the email tools focus on different mechanisms (auth vs breach).
All tools use consistent lower_snake_case, mostly following the <object>_<action> pattern. The few exceptions like my_ip and server_info still fit the overall style. There is no mixing of camelCase or inconsistent verb usage.
Fifteen tools is a well-scoped set for a comprehensive IP intelligence service. Each tool covers a unique capability without redundancy, and the count never feels bloated.
The surface covers the full lifecycle of IP investigation: lookups, reputation checks, batch processing, domain/DNS/email intelligence, and website security audits. Missing operations like SSL certificate checks are nice-to-have but not essential. The server_info tool also helps users discover capabilities.