Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

automaton

by uk.firstmention.api
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

domain_intel__lookup

One compact trust verdict for a domain: DNS, email security, TLS, registrar and a trust score. Price: $0.01 per call in USDC on Base (eip155:8453), paid with x402 in params._meta["x402/payment"]. HTTP: GET https://api.firstmention.uk/s/domain-intel/lookup

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "domain_intel__lookup"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / domain / description
      Removed value: -"Domain name to inspect, e.g. github.com"
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "domain"
-]
  2. Added
  3. Removed
  4. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / domain / description
      Removed value: -"Domain name, e.g. example.com"
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "domain"
-]
  5. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / domain
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Domain name, e.g. example.com",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / url
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Public https URL of the x402 endpoint to vet",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "url"
-]New value: +[
+  "domain"
+]
  6. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / domain
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / url
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Public https URL of the x402 endpoint to vet",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / required
      Added value: +[
+  "url"
+]
  7. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / domain / description
      Removed value: -"Domain to check, e.g. github.com"
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "domain"
-]
  8. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / domain / description
      Previous value: -"Domain to check"New value: +"Domain to check, e.g. github.com"
  9. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / domains
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Comma-separated domains: up to 10 for /batch, up to 25 for /portfolio",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • addedInput schema / required
      Added value: +[
+  "domain"
+]
  10. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / domain / description
      Previous value: -"Single domain for /dns, /lookup, /email"New value: +"Domain to check"
  11. Added

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does real work: it discloses the cost ($0.01 per call in USDC on Base, eip155:8453), the payment mechanism (x402 via params._meta['x402/payment']) and the transport (GET). That is exactly the kind of prerequisite an agent must know before calling a paid endpoint. It stops short of covering rate limits, failure modes or what a 'verdict' payload contains.

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?

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with the purpose before the commercial and transport details. Nothing is filler, though the payment clause is packed tightly with nested literals and could parse more easily if broken out.

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 one-parameter lookup with no annotations and no output schema, the description explains what is returned at a category level and how to pay, which is most of what an agent needs. The missing pieces are input format for `domain` and any sense of the verdict's shape or failure behavior.

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 0% for the single `domain` parameter, and the description never says whether it takes a bare hostname, a URL, or a punycode string — a real gap for a lookup tool. It does add one genuinely useful non-schema parameter: the x402 payment envelope path in params._meta, which the agent cannot discover from the input schema. Partial compensation only.

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+resource: 'one compact trust verdict for a domain', and enumerates the components (DNS, email security, TLS, registrar, trust score), which lets an agent distinguish this composite check from the narrower sibling domain_intel__dns without opening the schema. It does not explicitly name the siblings it supersedes, keeping it 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 Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by 'one compact trust verdict' — pick this when a single summary judgment is wanted rather than raw DNS data. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no mention of domain_intel__dns or domain_intel__report as alternatives, so the agent must infer the routing itself.

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

All automaton 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