Tessryx

Get custom domain

get_custom_domain

Read-only

Get a single custom domain by hostname: its lifecycle status, the DNS records the customer must publish, its routing (slug_prefix + root_endpoint), and any human-facing check/certificate messages. Use this to answer 'is my domain live yet?' and to re-display the DNS records for a pending domain.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`hostname`	Yes	the custom domain hostname, e.g. shop.customer.com

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`status`	Yes
`hostname`	Yes
`dns_records`	No
`slug_prefix`	No
`verified_at`	No
`activated_at`	No
`display_name`	No
`root_endpoint`	No
`last_check_message`	No
`cert_status_message`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

First observedSep 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safe read nature is established. The description adds the concrete data elements returned, but no additional behavioral traits such as pagination, caching, or permission requirements. It neither contradicts nor substantially extends the annotation coverage.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two sentences: the first states the operation and its returned fields, and the second provides concrete user intents. Every clause earns its place, and the main purpose is front-loaded.

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 one required parameter, full schema coverage, an output schema, and read-only annotations, the description provides all necessary decision-making information for a simple getter. The use cases also help an agent choose between this and sibling custom-domain tools.

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?

The sole parameter is fully documented in the schema with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to repeat syntax. The description confirms that the lookup is by hostname, matching the schema exactly. No extra semantic burden falls on the description.

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 clearly states the operation: get a single custom domain by hostname. It enumerates the returned content (lifecycle status, DNS records, routing, messages), which distinguishes it from list_custom_domains and other getters. There is no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explicitly gives practical use cases: answering 'is my domain live yet?' and re-displaying DNS records for a pending domain. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the provided context is strong enough for an agent to select this tool for single-domain lookup.

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

All Tessryx tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Every resource family follows the same verb+noun pattern and each tool name uniquely identifies a resource-action pair (create_app vs create_app_version vs update_app vs publish_app). Closest overlaps like analyze_resource vs get_resource_graph and patch_datafile vs update_datafile are explicitly differentiated by their descriptions, so misselection risk is low despite the scale.

Naming Consistency5/5

Names are almost uniformly verb_noun snake_case with a consistent lifecycle vocabulary: create/get/update/delete/list/publish/unpublish/version. Minor outliers like whoami and run_schedule_now are idiomatic and do not break the predictability of the set.

Tool Count1/5

At 93 tools this far exceeds the calibration's 50+ extreme-mismatch case. The count is inflated by repeating create/get/update/delete/version/publish/unpublish across ten resource families; even though each family is systematic, the combined surface is very hard for an agent to navigate and keep in context.

Completeness4/5

Core CRUD/publish/version lifecycles are present for apps, workflows, endpoints, schedules, schemas, datafiles, and api templates, and dependency analysis is well covered. However, secret creation/updating, asset upload, custom-domain deletion, and version-range enumeration for several resource types are absent or left to the external dashboard, so agents hit a few manual dead ends.

Resources

Need Help?