Whoisfreaks

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Bulk WHOIS lookup

bulkWhoisLookup

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve live WHOIS records for up to 100 domains in a single request to audit a domain portfolio or enrich a domain list without repeated single-domain lookups.

Instructions

Get the current WHOIS records of up to 100 domains in one request, queried live. Use this instead of calling liveWhoisLookup many times, for example to audit a domain portfolio or enrich a list of domains taken from logs. For one domain use liveWhoisLookup. Lists of more than 100 domains go in several calls; files of up to 3 million domains are handled by the Bulk Tool in the WhoisFreaks billing dashboard, not by this tool. Costs 1 credit per domain. A large batch can take a few minutes. Returns one WHOIS record per domain, with the same fields as liveWhoisLookup. Behavior: read-only. Makes one request to the WhoisFreaks API using your WhoisFreaks API key (the WHOISFREAKS_API_KEY environment variable, or on the hosted server the key sent with the request) and uses that account's API credits; nothing is created or changed. If the call fails, the result is a short message instead of data, for example: key invalid, or plan or credits used up (HTTP 401), domain extension not supported (HTTP 403), no data found (HTTP 404), or rate limit reached (HTTP 429).

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": {
      "domainNames": "<domainNames>"
    },
    "name": "bulkWhoisLookup"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`format`	No	Response format. Default: json
`domainNames`	Yes	Domain names to look up, at most 100. Example: ["whoisfreaks.com", "jfreaks.com"]

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv2.1.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/idempotent/non-destructive, yet the description still adds substantial operational context: 1 credit per domain cost, multi-minute latency for large batches, the exact auth mechanism (WHOISFREAKS_API_KEY or request-supplied key), and a mapped list of failure modes with HTTP codes (401, 403, 404, 429) plus the fact that failures return a short message rather than data. This goes well beyond what the annotations convey.

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 purpose and the sibling comparison before cost and error details, and most sentences carry distinct information. There is minor redundancy in restating 'Behavior: read-only... nothing is created or changed', which the annotations already assert, but overall the length is justified by the tool's operational complexity.

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 batch, credit-metered, externally-authenticated lookup with no output schema, the description covers cost model, latency expectations, batching limits, authentication source, failure semantics, and return shape ('one WHOIS record per domain, same fields as liveWhoisLookup'). Nothing an agent needs to call it safely and correctly is missing.

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%, so both domainNames and format are already documented with an example and enum, establishing the baseline of 3. The description confirms the 100-domain cap and the shape of the input but adds no syntax or format guidance for the format parameter beyond the schema.

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?

Opening sentence gives a specific verb (Get), resource (WHOIS records), scope (up to 100 domains, live), and immediately names the sibling alternative liveWhoisLookup. An agent can distinguish this from the single-domain tool without opening either 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?

Explicitly prescribes when to use this tool ('instead of calling liveWhoisLookup many times'), gives concrete scenarios (portfolio audit, enriching log domains), and routes elsewhere for the single-domain case and for >100 domains or 3M-domain files via the dashboard Bulk Tool. When-to-use, when-not-to-use, and alternatives are all covered.

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