Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

domain_subdomains

Discover public indexed subdomains for a domain from certificate transparency entries to support reconnaissance; results may be historical and are not verified against live DNS.

Instructions

List public indexed subdomains. Returns crt.name index entries. Names may be historical, are not checked against live DNS, and the source limits unauthenticated queries to 100 per source IP per day.

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": {
      "domain": "<domain>"
    },
    "name": "domain_subdomains"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesBare DNS hostname

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.20

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden and does substantial work: it discloses the underlying source, warns that names may be historical and unverified against live DNS, and states a concrete rate limit (100 unauthenticated queries per source IP per day). It stops short of describing output ordering, pagination, or whether the apex domain is included.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: purpose first, then data provenance, then the caveats and rate limit. Nothing is redundant and the most decision-relevant information is front-loaded.

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?

For a one-parameter, no-output-schema tool this is close to complete: source, staleness caveat, and rate limit are all covered. The remaining gap is return-shape detail (ordering, whether the apex is included, size limits), which is modest given the tool's simplicity.

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 the single 'domain' parameter is documented in the schema as a bare DNS hostname. The description adds only marginal meaning by framing the tool as enumerating subdomains of that input, which matches the baseline-3 expectation when 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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource, 'List public indexed subdomains', and names the data source (crt.name index entries), so an agent knows exactly what it returns. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like domain_dns_resolve, though the 'not checked against live DNS' note implicitly separates it from live-resolution tools.

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?

There is no explicit statement of when to use this versus alternatives such as domain_dns_resolve or domain_rdap_domain. Usage is only implied by the purpose sentence; the historical/no-live-DNS caveat hints at a distinction but never tells the agent to prefer another tool when live data is needed.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools