Skip to main content
Glama

validate_fix

Read-onlyIdempotent

Re-check a DNS security control after applying a fix to confirm the remediation was successful.

Instructions

Re-check a specific security control after applying a fix, to confirm the finding is now resolved. Use only when a fix has already been applied and you want to verify or confirm the remediation was successful — not for initial inspection of a record.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
checkYesCheck name to re-run (e.g., "dmarc", "spf")
domainYesDomain to validate the fix for
formatNoOutput verbosity. Auto-detected if omitted.
expectedNoExpected DNS record value to verify against
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint; description adds useful context that it is a re-check after fix, but does not elaborate on response behavior beyond that.

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, front-loaded with purpose then usage guideline, no unnecessary words. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given 4 parameters and no output schema, description adequately explains purpose and usage. Could briefly mention that output indicates pass/fail, but overall complete for agent decision-making.

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% with clear parameter descriptions; tool description does not add additional meaning beyond what schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states 'Re-check a specific security control after applying a fix', specifying verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like check_dmarc which are for initial inspection.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('after applying a fix') and when not to use ('not for initial inspection'), providing clear context for tool selection among siblings.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/MadaBurns/bv-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server