Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ffraud

ffraud

Official
by FFraud-com
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Hybrid

Domain check

domain_check
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check a domain's reputation for disposable mailboxes and phishing risk with one unauthenticated lookup, returning a risk level and requiring no API key.

Instructions

Reputation for a domain: whether it hands out disposable mailboxes and whether it appears in the phishing dataset, with a risk level. One unauthenticated lookup, no key.

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_check"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesA bare domain, e.g. mailinator.com (no scheme, no path)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that by disclosing the auth model ('one unauthenticated lookup, no key') and the shape of the result (two boolean-style signals plus a risk level), which matters because there is no output schema.

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, zero filler, with the resource and result content front-loaded before the auth/rate constraint. Every clause carries information an agent can act on.

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 single-parameter read-only lookup with full annotation coverage, this is nearly complete: it names inputs, outputs, and auth requirements. The minor gap is behavior on invalid or non-bare domain input (error vs. fallback), which the description does not address.

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 schema itself specifies 'a bare domain, e.g. mailinator.com (no scheme, no path)'. The description adds only the phrase 'for a domain', so it does not enrich parameter meaning beyond the structured field; baseline 3 applies.

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 gives a specific resource (a domain's reputation) and enumerates the concrete signals returned: disposable-mailbox behavior, phishing dataset membership, and a risk level. It is clear what the tool does, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with siblings like email_check or ip_check, relying on the 'domain' scoping to differentiate.

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 only implied: 'Reputation for a domain' tells an agent the input class but not when to prefer this over email_check or site_check, nor any exclusions. There is no when-not guidance and no stated prerequisites beyond the auth note.

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