Skip to main content
Glama
dnsdoctor

DNS Doctor

by dnsdoctor
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

add_monitored_domain

Idempotent

Add a domain to DNS Doctor monitoring to receive the ownership-check TXT record to publish, along with its DNS host and setup guide. Re-adding returns the existing entry.

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.

Input Schema

TableJSON 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 already declare the safety profile (readOnly=false, destructive=false, idempotent=true), and the description adds substantial context beyond them: it discloses that nothing is applied to DNS, that a human must publish records and approve, and that re-adding is idempotent. It also mandates exact reproduction of record strings, which is real operational guidance.

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 value, and every sentence carries operational weight (fallback routing, exact-string rule, approval requirement). It is dense and long, but little is wasted; the imperative instructions are arguably better placed in usage guidance.

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?

With no output schema, the description fully explains the return payload (TXT record, hosting location, guide link, apply URL) plus the account precondition and the no-DNS-mutation guarantee. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly and handle the result.

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% and the single parameter's semantics (registrable domain, refusal of unowned/nonexistent names) are fully documented in the schema itself. The description restates the re-add behavior but adds no format or syntax detail 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.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Add a domain to the signed-in user's DNS Doctor monitoring') and immediately describes what it returns (ownership-check TXT record, hosting location, guide link, apply URL). An agent can distinguish this from siblings like check_domain_verification and start_monitoring_signup without opening a 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 names the alternative and the condition that selects it: 'Needs a linked DNS Doctor account: until the human has one... use start_monitoring_signup and print its link instead.' Also states the re-adding behavior, so when-to-use, when-not, and fallback are all covered.

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