Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

InfraNest

by io.infranest
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List the records in a DNS zone

list_dns_records
Read-onlyIdempotent

Every record in the zone, ordered by type and name, with the dynamic IP source that keeps it up to date, if any. Filter by record type with type. Every record of one zone, with type, name, value and TTL. Narrow with type before paging. For where a hostname points across all zones use search_dns; for one name including live DNS use check_dns_name.

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": {
      "zone_id": "<zone_id>"
    },
    "name": "list_dns_records"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeNoOnly records of this type, e.g. A, CNAME, MX, TXT.
zone_idYesThe zone id, from list_dns_zones or the number of a search hit zone:N.
organization_idNoThe organization to read. Leave it out when the token reaches only one.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / zone_id / description
      Previous value: -"The zone id, from list_dns_zones."New value: +"The zone id, from list_dns_zones or the number of a search hit zone:N."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the description only needs to add context. It does: result ordering, the fields carried per record (type, name, value, TTL), the inclusion of a dynamic IP source, and the presence of paging. It never states pagination limits or default page size, which keeps it from a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The core content is front-loaded and useful, but the description repeats itself: 'Every record in the zone, ordered by type and name…' followed by 'Every record of one zone, with type, name, value and TTL.' Two sentences say substantially the same thing, diluting an otherwise tight definition.

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 no output schema, the description does the work of explaining what comes back: records with type, name, value, TTL, ordering by type and name, and the optional dynamic IP source. Combined with the sibling routing and the type-before-paging hint, an agent has what it needs to call this correctly; page size and count limits are the only notable omission.

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% and each parameter already has a description, including an example list of record types for `type`, so the baseline is 3. The description only restates that `type` filters and that it should be applied before paging, adding a small operational nuance rather than new semantics for any parameter.

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 ('Every record in the zone') plus scope details: ordered by type and name, including the dynamic IP source. It explicitly contrasts with siblings search_dns (cross-zone hostname lookup) and check_dns_name (single name with live DNS), so an agent can tell all three apart without opening schemas.

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 explicit routing rules: use search_dns for where a hostname points across all zones, check_dns_name for one name including live DNS. It also adds an operational instruction ('Narrow with type before paging'), so both selection and invocation guidance are present.

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

All InfraNest 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