PhishTank MCP Server

search_phish_by_target

Search for phishing URLs by target company or brand. Filter results to show only verified phishing URLs and limit the number returned.

Instructions

Search phishing URLs by target company/brand

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": {
      "target": "<target>"
    },
    "name": "search_phish_by_target"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`target`	Yes	Target company or brand name to search for (e.g., "PayPal", "Apple")
`limit`	No	Number of results to return (1-500, default: 50)
`verified_only`	No	Only return verified phishing URLs (default: true)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jun 18, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden. It only states the basic function without disclosing behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication needs, or what happens if no results are found.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the key action. While very brief, it is not verbose and gets the point across efficiently.

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

Completeness2/5

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

The description lacks details about output format, pagination, and behavioral nuances. Given no output schema, it should at least mention the type of results or any default 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 100%, so each parameter is already well-documented in the schema. The description adds no additional semantic value beyond what the schema provides.

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 action ('search') and resource ('phishing URLs') with a specific filter ('by target company/brand'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_phish_by_date, which searches by date.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple search tools available (search_phish_by_date), explicit usage context would be helpful.

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

Deploy Server