Skip to main content
Glama
dnsdoctor

DNS Doctor

by dnsdoctor
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

check_domain_verification

Idempotent

Confirm whether a domain's ownership TXT record is visible yet, mark it verified when found, and distinguish pending, wrong-value, and transient lookup outcomes.

Instructions

Check whether the ownership TXT record for a domain the user has added is visible yet, and mark it verified when it is. The result says WHICH outcome occurred and which nameservers were asked, so you can tell 'not published yet' from 'published with the wrong value' from 'our lookup did not complete' — a lookup that did not complete is TRANSIENT, never a verdict about their DNS. On success the result also carries the DMARC reporting record that turns monitoring on. 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

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare a non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation, and the description fills in the parts annotations cannot: that it flips the domain to verified, that lookup failures are transient, that nothing is applied to anyone's DNS, and that a human must approve records. That is exactly the extra context the bar asks for.

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-loads the action, then the outcome semantics, then the operational constraints. It is long and the record-printing/approval instructions are dense, but each sentence carries distinct operational weight.

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 must explain what comes back, and it does: the outcome, the nameservers queried, and the DMARC reporting record on success. Nothing needed to invoke or interpret this tool 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?

One parameter at 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already carries the domain semantics (must be a domain this account monitors). The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond that, which is the baseline-3 case.

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 (check whether the ownership TXT record for an added domain is visible) plus the side effect (mark it verified), which cleanly separates it from get_domain_records, add_monitored_domain and check_propagation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives clear conditions for use ('a domain the user has added') and rich guidance on interpreting outcomes, including the explicit rule that an incomplete lookup is transient and never a verdict. It does not name a sibling alternative to use instead in any case, so it stops short of a 5.

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