Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ffraud

ffraud

Official
by FFraud-com
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Hybrid

Email check

email_check
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check an email address before account creation to detect disposable or throwaway domains, role addresses, blacklisted emails, and temporary-mailbox providers.

Instructions

Check an email address before you let it create an account: whether it is disposable or throwaway, a role address, on a community blacklist, or tied to a domain that hands out temporary mailboxes. Free, 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": {
      "email": "<email>"
    },
    "name": "email_check"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailYesA full email address, e.g. someone@mailinator.com

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.1

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
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 genuinely non-structured context the agent would otherwise lack: the service is free and requires no API key, which affects whether the call is worth making. It does not disclose rate limits or response shape, keeping it below a 5.

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?

One front-loaded sentence carries the purpose, the checks performed, and the decision context, followed by a three-word cost/auth note. Nothing is padded or repeated from the title.

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, annotation-rich lookup tool this covers purpose, checks, cost and auth needs. With no output schema, the description could say more about what a result looks like (boolean, risk score, per-check flags), which is the main remaining gap.

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?

There is a single parameter at 100% schema coverage, with the schema supplying the format and an example address. The description only reinforces the input indirectly via the account-creation framing and adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline applies.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Check an email address') and then enumerates exactly what is being checked: disposable/throwaway, role address, community blacklist, temporary-mailbox domains. The resource (email) alone distinguishes it from siblings like domain_check and ip_check, so an agent can route without opening the schema.

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?

It states a concrete decision context — run it 'before you let it create an account' — which tells the agent when this tool is the right call. It stops short of naming alternatives or explicit when-not conditions, so it is clear context rather than full routing guidance.

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