Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
vulnerability-exposure-mcp

vulnerability-exposure-mcp

by MRFrazer25
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Resolve domain (DNS)

resolve_domain
Read-onlyIdempotent

Resolve any domain to its public IPv4 and IPv6 addresses, and optionally add the lookup to an active investigation for evidence, budget, and key facts.

Instructions

Resolve a domain to its public IPv4/IPv6 addresses. Already run for a domain target; use it for other domains you discover.

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": "resolve_domain"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesA domain name, e.g. 'example.com'.
investigation_idNoThe investigation_id from investigate_target. Pass it so the result counts toward that investigation's evidence, budget and key facts; without it the lookup runs on its own.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.0.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / domain / description
      Added value: +"A domain name, e.g. 'example.com'."
    • addedInput schema / properties / investigation_id / description
      Added value: +"The investigation_id from investigate_target. Pass it so the result counts toward that investigation's evidence, budget and key facts; without it the lookup runs on its own."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is fully covered structurally. The description adds only the 'public' qualifier on returned addresses, implying no internal/resolver enumeration. It says nothing about failure behavior (NXDOMAIN, no records) or output shape, which is a modest gap for an open-world network call.

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 short sentences with zero filler, and the core action is front-loaded before the usage note. Every clause carries information the agent needs.

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 two-parameter read-only lookup with no output schema and full annotation coverage, the description gives enough to invoke it correctly. The main omission is any hint about result shape or empty/failed resolution handling.

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 description coverage is 100%, including a detailed explanation of investigation_id and its effect on evidence, budget and key facts. The description adds no parameter guidance beyond the schema, so the 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?

States a specific verb and resource plus output scope: 'Resolve a domain to its public IPv4/IPv6 addresses.' It also distinguishes itself from investigate_target by noting resolution is 'already run for a domain target.' The sibling reference is implicit rather than named, so it stops short of a clean 5.

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?

'Already run for a domain target; use it for other domains you discover' gives a clear when-to-use and an implicit when-not-to-use condition. It does not address alternatives such as subdomains or whether to re-resolve a domain that was previously seen, leaving some routing inference to the agent.

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