Skip to main content
Glama
RoscoNL

intodns-mcp

by RoscoNL
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

check_email_security

Read-onlyIdempotent

Run a combined email-security audit covering SPF, DKIM, DMARC, and MX blacklist status, returning a 0-100 score with prioritized issues. Get a one-shot overview without separate checks.

Instructions

Read-only combined email-security check covering SPF parse, DKIM selector discovery, DMARC policy validation, MX IP blacklist status across major feeds, and an aggregated 0-100 email-security score with prioritised issue list. Single call replaces sequential check_spf + discover_dkim + check_dmarc + check_blacklist for the typical case. Use for one-shot email security overview; use check_sender_requirements specifically for Google/Yahoo bulk-sender compliance, or the individual check_* tools when you need only one signal. No auth, ~3-8s.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesDomain name only, e.g. example.com (no URL, path, or port)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.10.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • changedInput schema / properties / domain / description
      Previous value: -"Domain name, e.g. example.com"New value: +"Domain name only, e.g. example.com (no URL, path, or port)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / domain / maxLength
      Added value: +253
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. The description adds 'no auth' and a latency estimate of ~3-8s, providing extra context beyond annotations without contradiction.

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?

The description is concise and well-structured in two sentences, covering scope, output, and alternatives without redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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?

The tool's combined nature is well explained (what it checks, what it returns, when to use it). While the return format is not detailed, no output schema is provided, so it is sufficient for 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?

The only parameter 'domain' is fully described in the schema (including format constraints). The description does not add further parameter details, so it earns the baseline score for complete schema coverage.

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 clearly states a combined email-security check covering SPF, DKIM, DMARC, blacklist status, and an aggregated score with prioritized issues. It distinguishes itself from siblings by noting it replaces multiple individual check_* calls.

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 provides when to use this tool vs alternatives: 'Use for one-shot email security overview; use check_sender_requirements specifically for Google/Yahoo bulk-sender compliance, or the individual check_* tools when you need only one signal.' This is clear 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