Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
dnsdoctor

DNS Doctor

by dnsdoctor
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

Add Monitored Domain

add_monitored_domain
Idempotent

Add a domain to DNS Doctor monitoring and get the ownership-check TXT record to publish, plus DNS host details and provider-specific setup guidance.

Instructions

Add a domain to the signed-in user's DNS Doctor monitoring and return the ownership-check TXT record they must publish, plus where their DNS is hosted, a provider-specific guide link and, when their provider supports it, a one-click apply URL. Re-adding a domain they already monitor returns that domain rather than an error. Needs a linked DNS Doctor account: until the human has one, or if the host's connect prompt fails, use start_monitoring_signup and print its link instead. Print every record host and value EXACTLY as returned — never rewrite, reformat or improve a record string. Nothing here is applied to anyone's DNS: a human publishes every record, and you must show them what you are about to add and get their approval before using any DNS tool of your own. When guidance.note is present, relay it as given: it covers edge cases such as a domain on Automatic DMARC.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesThe domain, e.g. example.com. For add_monitored_domain: any registrable domain the linked account owns (re-adding one it already monitors returns that row). For check_domain_verification and get_domain_records: a domain this account already monitors, verified or still pending. Any other name — another account's, or one nobody monitors — is refused as not found; ownership is never disclosed.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.10.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / domain / description
      Previous value: -"One of the token account's VERIFIED monitored domains, e.g. example.com. Any other name — another account's, or one nobody monitors — is refused as not found; ownership is never disclosed."New value: +"The domain, e.g. example.com. For add_monitored_domain: any registrable domain the linked account owns (re-adding one it already monitors returns that row). For check_domain_verification and get_domain_records: a domain this account already monitors, verified or still pending. Any other name — another account's, or one nobody monitors — is refused as not found; ownership is never disclosed."
  2. Addedv1.9.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare non-read-only, open-world, idempotent, non-destructive; the description adds substantial context beyond them: re-adding returns the existing row rather than erroring, nothing is applied to DNS, a human must publish records, and exact record strings must be relayed verbatim. That is meaningful behavioral and safety guidance the annotations do not 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 the core action and return payload, then safety rules. Dense but every clause carries real instruction (approval, verbatim printing, guidance.note relay). Slightly heavy with em-dashes and parentheticals, but no filler.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description covers the return payload (TXT record, host, guide link, apply URL, guidance.note), the fallback path, and the human-in-the-loop safety requirement. Nothing essential for correct invocation 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?

Only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains the domain argument thoroughly. The description adds no additional detail about the domain param (format, registrability, error behavior is left to the schema). Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Add a domain to the signed-in user's DNS Doctor monitoring') and enumerates exactly what comes back: the ownership TXT record, hosting provider, guide link, and optional one-click apply URL. This is clearly distinguishable from siblings like start_monitoring_signup or list_my_domains.

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?

Explicit routing: 'until the human has one, or if the host's connect prompt fails, use start_monitoring_signup and print its link instead.' It also states the approval precondition before using any DNS tool and the re-adding behavior. When-to-use, when-not-to-use, and the alternative are all named.

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