email-verify-mcp

by io.github.robertoyanguas-ops

Overview Discussions Admin

Server Details

Validates email syntax, disposable/burner provider status, role accounts, and live DNS records.

Ownership verified

Status: Healthy
Uptime: 100.0% over 21 days
Last Tested: 2026-11-02 12:19
Transport: Streamable HTTP · MCP 2025-11-25
URL

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Scored 2026-10-19 00:45 across 2 tools

Disambiguation4/5

The two tools target clearly different concerns: one inspects an agent's billing/usage ledger, the other performs email deliverability validation. However, both descriptions reference 'other tools on this server for execution' (marketplace tools, payments, Stripe top-up), implying capabilities that do not exist, which adds mild confusion about the real surface.

Naming Consistency5/5

Both names follow a clean snake_case verb_noun pattern (get_agent_wallet_status, verify_email_deliverability). The convention is consistent and immediately readable.

Tool Count3/5

With only 2 tools for a paid verification service that also involves wallet management and payment/top-up flows, the surface is borderline thin. The count is defensible for a narrow single-purpose service, but two tools feels minimal given the described billing machinery.

Completeness3/5

Email verification itself is covered well (syntax, disposable, role, DNS MX/SPF/DMARC), and wallet status supports billing. But no dedicated payment/top-up tool exists despite extensive references to Stripe/USDC payments and 'other tools,' and there is no batch-verification option, leaving notable gaps.

Available Tools

2 tools

get_agent_wallet_statusA

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect

Inspect an agent's account ledger: remaining free trial calls (out of 5), prepaid USD balance, cumulative spend, total API calls, and total LLM tokens saved. WHEN TO USE: Call before a batch of paid tool executions or after completing a Stripe or USDC top-up to confirm your balance. WHEN NOT TO USE: Do not use to process web content, execute marketplace tools, or submit payments; use the other tools on this server for execution. PARAMETER INTERACTIONS: Omit agent_id to inspect the default trial account derived from your client IP, or pass your explicit agent_id or agd_pass_ session key to check a specific funded wallet. Free and read-only: never charges a fee or consumes a free trial call. Example: get_agent_wallet_status(agent_id='example')

Name	Required	Description	Default
`agent_id`	No	Optional Agent ID or agd_pass_ session key to inspect. Omit to check the default wallet derived from your client IP.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`data`	No	Structured tool output payload.
`status`	Yes	Execution status ('ok' or 'payment_required').
`roi_proof`	No	Token compression and cost-savings verification metrics.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: it never charges a fee or consumes a free trial call, and the default wallet is derived from the caller's client IP. It does not discuss rate limits or caching, but the cost/free-trial guarantee is meaningful behavioral disclosure.

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?

Front-loaded with the ledger contents, then structured WHEN TO USE / WHEN NOT TO USE / PARAMETER INTERACTIONS / Example. The labeled sections make it scannable, though the repetition of the read-only guarantee and the worked example add a little bulk.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail is optional, yet the description still names the key fields. With a single optional parameter, no nested objects, and annotations covering safety, an agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description goes slightly further by naming the agd_pass_ session-key form and framing the two modes as an interaction (omit for IP-derived trial account vs. pass explicit agent_id/session key for a funded wallet), which aids selection even though the schema states the omit behavior.

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 (inspect) and resource (agent's account ledger) and enumerates exactly what is returned: trial calls out of 5, prepaid USD balance, cumulative spend, total API calls, tokens saved. This clearly separates it from the sibling web-content tools (distill_webpage, extract_structured_data, recon_webpage_skeleton), which operate on webpages rather than wallet state.

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?

Explicit WHEN TO USE (before paid tool batches, after a Stripe or USDC top-up) and WHEN NOT TO USE (not for processing web content, executing marketplace tools, or submitting payments). The exclusion clause routes the agent back to the other server tools for execution, so the alternative is named.

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

verify_email_deliverabilityA

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect

Validates email syntax, disposable/burner provider status, role accounts, and live DNS MX/SPF/DMARC records. WHEN TO USE: Call verify_email_deliverability when your task requires deterministic email-verify analysis for email; use get_agent_wallet_status to check your remaining free trial quota or prepaid balance. WHEN NOT TO USE: Do not use for unrelated domains or binary media. PARAMETER INTERACTIONS: Pass the target email as a non-empty string; omit agent_id and tx_hash during your 5 free trial calls, or supply agent_id (agd_pass_...) / tx_hash for paid execution. Read-only and idempotent; results are cached for 1 hour (<5ms cache hit). $0.005 per call. Pricing: the first 5 calls per agent_id are free and failed calls are never charged. After 5 calls, the tool returns a payment-required quote (not a fatal error) with a $2 Stripe top-up link and Base/Solana USDC addresses; complete payment, then retry with your agd_pass_ key in agent_id or pass tx_hash. Example: verify_email_deliverability(email='example')

Name	Required	Description
`email`	Yes	Email address to validate for syntax, MX deliverability, and disposable risk.
`tx_hash`	No	Optional on-chain Base Mainnet (0x...) or Solana SPL USDC transaction hash. Omit unless settling an individual call directly on-chain instead of using an agd_pass_ key in agent_id.
`agent_id`	No	Optional agent identifier or prepaid agd_pass_ session key. Omit during your 5 free trial calls to use an ID automatically derived from your client IP, or pass your agd_pass_ key after topping up.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`data`	No	Structured tool output payload.
`status`	Yes	Execution status ('ok' or 'payment_required').
`roi_proof`	No	Token compression and cost-savings verification metrics.

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), the description discloses non-obvious behavior: 1-hour caching with <5ms hits, $0.005 per-call pricing, 5 free trial calls, failed calls never charged, and that exceeding quota returns a payment-required quote rather than a fatal error, with concrete retry paths via agd_pass_ key or tx_hash.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose then WHEN TO USE/NOT, which is good structure. It is somewhat over-long and repeats pricing twice ('$0.005 per call' and the 'Pricing:' sentence plus a re-explanation of the free tier), costing some efficiency without obscuring the core call guidance.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value details are correctly omitted, and the description still covers the full decision surface: purpose, exclusions, parameter interactions, cost model, failure/payment handling, and a working example. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so per-parameter meaning is already documented, but the description adds interaction semantics the schema lacks: omit `agent_id`/`tx_hash` during the 5 free trial calls and supply them for paid execution. That is genuine added value, though it mostly restates the schema's payment-parameter guidance.

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 precise verb+resource ('Validates email syntax, disposable/burner provider status, role accounts, and live DNS MX/SPF/DMARC records'), making the exact analysis performed unambiguous. It also implicitly separates itself from the sibling `get_agent_wallet_status`, which it names for a different concern (quota/balance).

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?

Explicit WHEN TO USE / WHEN NOT TO USE blocks name the condition that selects this tool and route the agent to `get_agent_wallet_status` for quota checks. It also excludes unrelated cases ('unrelated domains or binary media'), leaving nothing to inference.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

2 tool updatesOct 19, 2026
- Changedget_agent_wallet_status1 field changed
  - addedInput schema / examples
```
Added value: +[
+  {
+    "agent_id": "example"
+  }
+]
```
- Changedverify_email_deliverability1 field changed
  - addedInput schema / examples
```
Added value: +[
+  {
+    "email": "example"
+  }
+]
```

2 tool updatesOct 18, 2026

Changedget_agent_wallet_status6 fields changed

changedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -trueNew value: +false
```

changedInput schema / properties / agent_id / description

Previous value: -"Agent ID or agd_pass_ key to look up. Omit it to see the ID derived from your IP and client."New value: +"Optional Agent ID or agd_pass_ session key to inspect. Omit to check the default wallet derived from your client IP."

addedInput schema / properties / agent_id / maxLength
```
Added value: +256
```
addedInput schema / properties / agent_id / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```

removedInput schema / properties / tx_hash

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Not needed; this tool is free.",
-  "type": "string"
-}

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "description": "Structured tool output payload.",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "roi_proof": {
+      "description": "Token compression and cost-savings verification metrics.",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "description": "Execution status ('ok' or 'payment_required').",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "status"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changedverify_email_deliverability8 fields changed

changedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -trueNew value: +false
```

changedInput schema / properties / agent_id / description

Previous value: -"Your agent ID, or the agd_pass_ key you got from a payment. It tracks your free calls and credit, so treat it like a password. Omit it to use an ID derived from your IP and client."New value: +"Optional agent identifier or prepaid agd_pass_ session key. Omit during your 5 free trial calls to use an ID automatically derived from your client IP, or pass your agd_pass_ key after topping up."

addedInput schema / properties / agent_id / maxLength
```
Added value: +256
```
addedInput schema / properties / agent_id / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```

changedInput schema / properties / tx_hash / description

Previous value: -"Use only after paying on-chain: the Base (0x...) or Solana USDC transfer hash. It is verified on-chain before the call runs, and any overpayment is returned as an agd_pass_ credit key."New value: +"Optional on-chain Base Mainnet (0x...) or Solana SPL USDC transaction hash. Omit unless settling an individual call directly on-chain instead of using an agd_pass_ key in agent_id."

addedInput schema / properties / tx_hash / maxLength
```
Added value: +256
```
addedInput schema / properties / tx_hash / minLength
```
Added value: +10
```

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "description": "Structured tool output payload.",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "roi_proof": {
+      "description": "Token compression and cost-savings verification metrics.",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "description": "Execution status ('ok' or 'payment_required').",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "status"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

2 tool updatesOct 16, 2026

Changedget_agent_wallet_status2 fields changed

changedInput schema / properties / agent_id / description

Previous value: -"Optional Agent ID or Session Pass (agd_pass_...)"New value: +"Agent ID or agd_pass_ key to look up. Omit it to see the ID derived from your IP and client."

changedInput schema / properties / tx_hash / description

Previous value: -"Optional Base (0x...) or Solana USDC tx hash"New value: +"Not needed; this tool is free."

Changedverify_email_deliverability3 fields changed

changedInput schema / properties / agent_id / description

Previous value: -"Optional Agent ID or Session Pass (agd_pass_...)"New value: +"Your agent ID, or the agd_pass_ key you got from a payment. It tracks your free calls and credit, so treat it like a password. Omit it to use an ID derived from your IP and client."

changedInput schema / properties / email / description

Previous value: -"Email address to validate for syntax, MX deliverability, and disposable risk"New value: +"Email address to validate for syntax, MX deliverability, and disposable risk."

changedInput schema / properties / tx_hash / description

Previous value: -"Optional Base (0x...) or Solana USDC tx hash"New value: +"Use only after paying on-chain: the Base (0x...) or Solana USDC transfer hash. It is verified on-chain before the call runs, and any overpayment is returned as an agd_pass_ credit key."

2 tool updatesOct 16, 2026

Changedget_agent_wallet_status5 fields changed
- changedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -falseNew value: +true
```
- addedInput schema / properties / agent_id / description
```
Added value: +"Optional Agent ID or Session Pass (agd_pass_...)"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / agent_id / maxLength
```
Removed value: -99999
```
- removedInput schema / properties / agent_id / minLength
```
Removed value: -1
```
- addedInput schema / properties / tx_hash
```
Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional Base (0x...) or Solana USDC tx hash",
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

Changedverify_email_deliverability3 fields changed

changedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -falseNew value: +true
```

addedInput schema / properties / agent_id

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional Agent ID or Session Pass (agd_pass_...)",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / tx_hash

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional Base (0x...) or Solana USDC tx hash",
+  "type": "string"
+}

Related MCP Connectors

AgentDiet B2A Email Deliverability, MX, SPF & DMARC Verifier A
dev.agentdiet
Validates email syntax, disposable/burner provider status, role accounts, and live DNS MX/SPF/DMA.
Email Security Networking & Infrastructure
21
https://email-verify.agentdiet.dev/mcp
Email Validator (MX, Disposable, Typo)
io.github.fairquery
Validate emails without sending mail: syntax, MX, disposable, role and typo checks, SPF/DMARC.
Email Security
1
https://mcp.apify.com/?tools=fetch-actor-details,fairquery/email-validator-mx-disposable
Email Verifier MCP
io.github.PanStories
Verify email deliverability with RFC format, MX, SMTP and disposable-domain checks.
Email Security
1
https://neeenja--email-verifier-mcp.apify.actor/mcp
Email Verification MCP A
io.github.FoundryNet
Verify emails — deliverability, disposable/role/free detection, MX validity, domain age.
Email Security
2
https://email-verify-mcp-production.up.railway.app/mcp

Related MCP Servers

Email Verification MCP Server
Email Security
naman-upreti
F
license
Not graded
quality
C
maintenance
Provides email verification as a tool, performing syntax validation, domain verification, and disposable-domain risk detection.
Updated 3 months ago (2026-08-13 08:31 UTC)
-
mailverdict
Email Developer Tools
mailverdict
A
license
Not graded
quality
B
maintenance
Keyless email validation: disposable/burner, role-account, and free-provider detection, MX checks, and typo suggestions. Tools: check_email, check_domain.
Updated 3 days ago (2026-10-30 11:27 UTC)
MIT
InboxValid MCP Server
Email Security
siddreddy07
A
license
Not graded
quality
D
maintenance
Provides email verification as an MCP tool, checking format, disposable domains, and mail server availability with structured results.
Updated 3 months ago (2026-08-12 11:53 UTC)
ISC
NoBounce Email Validation MCP
Email Developer Tools
notprathap
A
license
A
quality
B
maintenance
Enables AI assistants to verify single email addresses and bulk lists of up to 1,000 addresses in real time, checking RFC 5322 syntax, DNS MX records, disposable providers, role accounts, and typos, with an optional deep SMTP mailbox handshake. Bulk runs handle partial-quota situations gracefully.
Updated 14 days ago (2026-10-19 08:50 UTC)
2
MIT

Try in Browser

Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?

Server Details

TDQS

Available Tools

Output Schema

TDQS

Output Schema

TDQS

Tool Schema Changelog

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

Email Verification MCP Server

mailverdict

InboxValid MCP Server

NoBounce Email Validation MCP

Glama MCP Gateway

Resources