Agent Margin Router

DNS Lookup

dns_lookup

Read-only

Resolve any DNS record type (A, AAAA, CNAME, MX, NS, TXT, SOA, SRV, CAA, PTR) over DNS-over-HTTPS with TTLs and DNSSEC validation flag. Pay per call with USDC or USDT on Base via x402. 3 free calls per wallet.

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_lookup"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	Host name to resolve.
`wallet`	No	Your EVM wallet address (0x...). Unlocks the free tier (3 free calls per wallet).
`api_key`	No	Optional AMR enterprise API key.
`x_payment`	No	Optional signed x402 payment payload (base64 JSON) for USDC/USDT on Base.
`record_type`	No	Record type (default A).	A

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes
`token`	No	Token actually used for payment (USDC, USDT or FREE).	USDC
`source`	Yes
`status`	No
`answers`	Yes
`routing`	Yes	How the request was routed (provider, fallback, cache, latency).
`resolver`	No
`authority`	No
`cost_usdc`	Yes	Price charged in stablecoin units (USDC/USDT 1:1); 0 on the free tier.
`fetched_at`	No	UTC timestamp when the data was fetched.
`record_type`	Yes
`answer_count`	Yes
`dnssec_validated`	No
`freshness_seconds`	Yes	Age of the underlying data in seconds (0 = fetched live).
`x_payment_response`	No	Base64-encoded x402 settlement receipt (mirrors the X-PAYMENT-RESPONSE header). Only present when the call was paid with `x_payment`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 15, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "description": "Response for ``POST /dns-lookup``.",
+  "properties": {
+    "answer_count": {
+      "title": "Answer Count",
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "answers": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": true,
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "title": "Answers",
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "authority": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": true,
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "title": "Authority",
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "cost_usdc": {
+      "description": "Price charged in stablecoin units (USDC/USDT 1:1); 0 on the free tier.",
+      "title": "Cost Usdc",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "dnssec_validated": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "default": null,
+      "title": "Dnssec Validated"
+    },
+    "fetched_at": {
+      "description": "UTC timestamp when the data was fetched.",
+      "format": "date-time",
+      "title": "Fetched At",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "freshness_seconds": {
+      "description": "Age of the underlying data in seconds (0 = fetched live).",
+      "title": "Freshness Seconds",
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "title": "Name",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "record_type": {
+      "title": "Record Type",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "resolver": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "default": null,
+      "title": "Resolver"
+    },
+    "routing": {
+      "description": "How the request was routed (provider, fallback, cache, latency).",
+      "properties": {
+        "cache_hit": {
+          "default": false,
+          "description": "True if the result was served from cache.",
+          "title": "Cache Hit",
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        "fallback_used": {
+          "default": false,
+          "description": "True if the primary provider failed and a fallback served the result.",
+          "title": "Fallback Used",
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        "latency_ms": {
+          "default": 0,
+          "description": "End-to-end routing latency in milliseconds.",
+          "title": "Latency Ms",
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "provider": {
+          "description": "Name of the upstream provider that served the result.",
+          "title": "Provider",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "providers_tried": {
+          "description": "Providers attempted, in order.",
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "title": "Providers Tried",
+          "type": "array"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "provider"
+      ],
+      "title": "RoutingMeta",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "source": {
+      "title": "Source",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ],
+      "default": null,
+      "title": "Status"
+    },
+    "token": {
+      "default": "USDC",
+      "description": "Token actually used for payment (USDC, USDT or FREE).",
+      "title": "Token",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "x_payment_response": {
+      "description": "Base64-encoded x402 settlement receipt (mirrors the X-PAYMENT-RESPONSE header). Only present when the call was paid with `x_payment`.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "freshness_seconds",
+    "cost_usdc",
+    "routing",
+    "name",
+    "record_type",
+    "answers",
+    "answer_count",
+    "source"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedSep 13, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description carries the burden of disclosing payment requirements. It adds valuable behavioral context: calls are paid via USDC/USDT on Base with x402, and each wallet gets 3 free calls. This is meaningful beyond what annotations provide.

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?

Two sentences with no fluff. The core DNS-resolution capability is front-loaded, followed by the payment constraint and free-tier note. Every sentence earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema present and full parameter documentation, the description covers supported record types, transport, and payment behavior. The only notable gap is the lack of explicit pricing per call and no direct comparison with sibling tools like dns_whois, but overall the agent has enough to invoke the tool 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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description mentions record types and free-tier limits, but those are already present in the schema's enum and wallet description. The description adds no significant parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 clearly states a specific action ('Resolve any DNS record type'), lists the exact record types, and distinguishes itself via DNS-over-HTTPS and TTL/DNSSEC details. It is not a tautology, but it does not explicitly name or differentiate against dns_whois or domain_rdap.

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?

The description provides clear context for when to use this tool: resolving DNS records over DNS-over-HTTPS. However, it does not explicitly state when to use an alternative like dns_whois or domain_rdap, so the guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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

All Agent Margin Router 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.