IPGeolocation MCP Server

Abuse Contact Lookup

get_abuse_contact

Read-only

Read-only abuse contact lookup via GET /v3/abuse. Paid only. Cost: 1 credit. This endpoint is dedicated to abuse contact data; lookup_ip with include=abuse provides abuse data together with location, security, ASN/company, timezone…

Instructions

Returns { ip, abuse } with route, country, name, organization, kind, address, emails, and phone_numbers for reporting abuse.

fields/excludes accept comma-separated abuse.* paths such as abuse.emails; ip is always returned. force_refresh bypasses cached data, makes a new upstream request, and can consume credits.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ip`	No	IPv4 or IPv6 address to get abuse contact for. Omit to use the server's public egress IP.
`fields`	No	Comma-separated abuse fields to return (e.g. abuse.emails,abuse.organization). Reduces response size.
`excludes`	No	Comma-separated abuse fields to exclude from response (e.g. abuse.phone_numbers,abuse.address).
`force_refresh`	No	Default false. When true, bypasses cached abuse contact data; a successful refresh makes a new upstream request and can consume credits.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`data`	No	Present on success: API result after field selection, redaction, and transport limits.
`page`	No
`error`	No	Present on failure, with isError: true.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv2.0.3Oct 28, 2026

removedOutput schema / properties / data / additionalProperties / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "boolean"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "number"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "array"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "object"
-  }
-]

addedOutput schema / properties / data / additionalProperties / type

Added value: +[
+  "null",
+  "boolean",
+  "number",
+  "string",
+  "array",
+  "object"
+]

Addedv2.0.1Oct 13, 2026
Removedv2.0.0Jul 25, 2026

Changed3 schema fields changedv1.0.15May 8, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / excludes / description

Previous value: -"Comma-separated fields to exclude from response (e.g. phone_numbers,address)."New value: +"Comma-separated abuse fields to exclude from response (e.g. abuse.phone_numbers,abuse.address)."

changedInput schema / properties / fields / description

Previous value: -"Comma-separated fields to return (e.g. emails,organization). Reduces response size. Works on all plans."New value: +"Comma-separated abuse fields to return (e.g. abuse.emails,abuse.organization). Reduces response size."

changedInput schema / properties / force_refresh / description

Previous value: -"Default false. Leave unset unless the user asks to refresh or rerun."New value: +"Default false. Set true only when the user asks to refresh cached abuse contact data; a successful refresh makes a new upstream request and can consume credits."

First observedv1.0.10Mar 16, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, it discloses credit cost, that force_refresh makes a new upstream request and can consume additional credits, that ip is always returned regardless of fields/excludes, and the return shape. This is exactly the behavioral context annotations cannot express.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, cost, and the sibling alternative before details. Mild redundancy: the return-field list duplicates what the output schema already provides, and the raw route 'GET /v3/abuse' is not actionable for an agent.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a read-only, zero-required-parameter lookup with a full output schema, the description covers cost, caching, filtering semantics, and fallback behavior. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is already 100%, yet the description adds meaning: fields/excludes take comma-separated abuse.* paths (e.g. abuse.emails), and ip cannot be excluded. Slight overlap with the schema rather than pure added value, but the 'ip is always returned' invariant is genuinely new.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Read-only abuse contact lookup via GET /v3/abuse') and explicitly separates this tool from lookup_ip with include=abuse. An agent can distinguish it from all siblings 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 Guidelines5/5

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

It names the alternative (lookup_ip with include=abuse) and the condition that selects it — when you need abuse data together with location, security, ASN/company, timezone, network or currency. It also flags 'Paid only. Cost: 1 credit,' giving a clear cost-based selection rule.

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

Deploy Server