Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

WhoisFreaks

by io.github.WhoisFreaks
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

WHOIS history

whoisHistory
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the historical WHOIS records of a domain: deduplicated snapshots ordered from newest to oldest, going back as far as 1986. Use this to see previous owners, registrar transfers, past contacts, name server changes, or when a domain expired and was re-registered. For only the current record use liveWhoisLookup. For DNS changes over time use dnsHistory. Costs 2 credits. Every record comes back in one response; there are no pages. Returns a list of snapshots, each with the registrar, dates, contacts and name servers recorded at that time. A domain with no recorded history returns a "no data found" message. Behavior: read-only. Makes one request to the WhoisFreaks API using your WhoisFreaks API key (the WHOISFREAKS_API_KEY environment variable, or on the hosted server the key sent with the request) and uses that account's API credits; nothing is created or changed. If the call fails, the result is a short message instead of data, for example: key invalid, or plan or credits used up (HTTP 401), domain extension not supported (HTTP 403), no data found (HTTP 404), or rate limit reached (HTTP 429).

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": {
      "domainName": "<domainName>"
    },
    "name": "whoisHistory"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
formatNoResponse format. Default: json
domainNameYesDomain name to look up history for. Examples: whoisfreaks.com | google.com

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/idempotent/non-destructive, yet the description adds substantial context beyond them: 2-credit cost, single-response with no pagination, required API key via WHOISFREAKS_API_KEY or request-supplied key, and that nothing is created or changed. It further enumerates failure modes with HTTP codes (401 bad key, 403 unsupported extension, 404 no data, 429 rate limit), which is exactly the operational detail annotations cannot convey.

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 scope are front-loaded in the first sentence, then alternatives, cost, return shape, and behavior follow in a logical order. The explicit HTTP-code enumeration is slightly heavy for a description but each item is actionable for error handling, so little is wasted.

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 carries the return-value burden and does so: it describes the snapshot list with registrar, dates, contacts and name servers, plus the "no data found" case. Combined with cost, auth, and error behavior, nothing an agent needs to call or interpret this tool 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 description coverage is 100%, so both parameters (domainName, format) are already documented in the schema, establishing the baseline of 3. The description adds no syntax or format guidance beyond what the schema provides — the format/xml option is never mentioned in prose.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource ("Get the historical WHOIS records of a domain") plus the ordering and depth (deduplicated snapshots newest-to-oldest back to 1986). It explicitly differentiates itself from liveWhoisLookup and dnsHistory, so an agent can pick the right tool without opening a 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?

It names concrete use cases (previous owners, registrar transfers, past contacts, name server changes, expiry/re-registration) and routes alternatives explicitly: liveWhoisLookup for the current record only, dnsHistory for DNS changes over time. Both when-to-use and when-not-to-use are covered.

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