Tomba MCP Server

Domain Search

domain_search

Read-only

Search for all email addresses associated with a specific domain or company. Returns a list of email addresses found for the given company domain along with metadata about each contact.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`page`	No	Page number for pagination
`limit`	No	Maximum number of results to return (10, 20, or 50)	10
`domain`	No	The domain to search for emails (e.g., 'example.com')
`company`	No	The company name to search for
`country`	No	Filter by country code (e.g., 'US', 'GB')
`department`	No	Filter by department (e.g., 'executive', 'it', 'marketing')
`webhook_url`	No	Optional webhook URL to receive results asynchronously
`enrich_mobile`	No	Whether to enrich with mobile phone data

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 2, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {}
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "data"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedAug 7, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, reducing the burden on the description. The description adds that results include metadata about each contact, but it does not disclose behavioral nuances such as pagination boundaries, the meaning of 'all' given page/limit controls, or asynchronous delivery via webhook_url. It neither contradicts nor meaningfully extends the annotations.

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?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence that communicates the core action and result shape without padding. The only minor redundancy is 'specific domain or company' followed by 'given company domain', which slightly dilutes precision but does not materially harm clarity.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a tool with 8 optional parameters and zero required parameters, the description is thin on operational context: it does not explain whether at least one of domain/company is required, how they relate, or when features like webhook_url or enrich_mobile should be used. The rich parameter schema and output schema mitigate this somewhat, but the description itself does not fully equip an agent to call the tool correctly in varied situations.

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 the input schema already documents all 8 parameters. The description adds no extra meaning about how parameters interact, which of domain vs. company is preferred, or when filters should be used; the baseline score of 3 is appropriate because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('all email addresses associated with a specific domain or company'), and clearly indicates the return payload is a list with contact metadata. This is identifiable among many sibling search tools, but it does not explicitly name or contrast any sibling, so it falls short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives like email_finder, email_count, or mpp_domain_search. There are no exclusion criteria, prerequisites, or hints about which of the 8 optional parameters should be supplied, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage.

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

All Tomba MCP Server 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.