Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

WhoisFreaks

by io.github.WhoisFreaks
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

API key usage

apiKeyUsage
Read-onlyIdempotent

Show how much of the WhoisFreaks API key's allowance is used: pay-as-you-go credits bought and used, and the subscription's status, request limit, requests used and surcharge requests. Use this before a large job (a bulk lookup, many pages of reverse WHOIS or typosquatting results) to check there is enough left, or when a lookup fails with a plan or credit limit error. Returns the key (masked), its credits and its subscription usage; a part the account does not have is left out. Behavior: read-only. Reads the usage of your WhoisFreaks API key (the WHOISFREAKS_API_KEY environment variable, or on the hosted server the key sent with the request); it looks nothing up and changes nothing. If the key is invalid the result is a short message (HTTP 401) instead of data.

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": "apiKeyUsage"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false), but the description adds real context: which key is read (WHOISFREAKS_API_KEY or the hosted-server request key), that the key comes back masked, that account-absent sections are omitted, and that an invalid key yields a short 401 message instead of data.

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?

Purpose and usage triggers are front-loaded and every paragraph carries information. There is mild redundancy: read-only behavior is stated in prose while annotations already declare it, and "it looks nothing up and changes nothing" restates that.

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?

With no output schema, the description must describe the return value and does: masked key, credits, subscription usage, with absent sections omitted. It also covers the failure mode (short 401 message), so an agent knows both success and error shapes.

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 takes no parameters, so there is nothing to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly spends no words on parameter syntax.

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 and resource: reports how much of the WhoisFreaks API key's allowance is used, broken into credits and subscription usage. That is clearly distinguishable from every sibling, all of which are lookups, and the description says explicitly that this tool "looks nothing up".

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 two concrete when-to-use triggers: before a large job (bulk lookup, many pages of reverse WHOIS or typosquatting) to confirm headroom, and after a lookup fails with a plan or credit-limit error. It also implies the negative case by noting that no lookups happen here.

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

All WhoisFreaks 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