Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
fairquery-agent-trust-mcp

fairquery-agent-trust-mcp

Official
by fairquery
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Validate email deliverability: MX, SPF, DMARC (paid)

email_validate_deliverability
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check if an email domain can receive mail with MX/DNS lookups, flagging disposable, role, and free-provider addresses before you send.

Instructions

WHAT: Runs the Fairquery Apify Actor email-validator-mx-disposable: syntax, domain existence, MX/null-MX, disposable, role, free provider, typo suggestion, SPF/DMARC policy, mail provider; final verdict valid | risky | invalid | unknown. WHEN: Only when MX/DNS matters (can the domain receive mail?), e.g. cleaning lists before a send or verifying a lead's domain; for format, typo, disposable or role checks use email_check_syntax (free, local) and pre-filter with it to avoid paying for obviously bad rows. WHEN NOT: Offline format/typo checks (free email_check_syntax). Leads that also need sanctions screening: trust_screen_lead (one merged decision). It does not SMTP-probe mailboxes. COST: Paid, billed to YOUR Apify account via your APIFY_TOKEN: $0.00079 per email (+ $0.00005/run). 100 emails ~ $0.08. RETURNS: Paged "email" rows (verdict valid | risky | invalid | unknown with reasons[]) or "error" rows. Tool errors: APIFY_TOKEN_MISSING, APIFY_TOKEN_INVALID, APIFY_PAYMENT_REQUIRED, APIFY_ACTOR_RUN_FAILED, APIFY_TIMEOUT. BEHAVIOR: No email is sent; results change only with live DNS. Makes network calls: runs an Apify Actor (DNS/MX lookups) in your account; latency seconds to minutes (300 s timeout). PARAMETERS: emails: elements may also hold comma/semicolon/newline-separated lists or "Name " forms; the Actor splits them, trims, and skips case-insensitive duplicates, so you pay once per unique address. The allow* flags only decide whether a condition downgrades the verdict to "risky": the matching reason code (ROLE_ACCOUNT, DISPOSABLE_DOMAIN, FREE_PROVIDER) is reported in reasons[] either way, and they can never turn an "invalid" address (bad syntax, no domain, null MX, no mail server) into "valid". POSSIBLE_TYPO and IMPLICIT_MX_ONLY always make it "risky" regardless of flags. Typical presets: B2B lead list = allowFreeProviders false + allowRoleAccounts false; consumer signups = defaults. checkSpfDmarc only adds has_spf / has_dmarc / dmarc_policy fields; it never changes the verdict or the price. limit/offset only page the returned rows: every call validates and bills the whole list again (also when only offset changes), so set limit (max 1000) to cover all rows instead of paging. EXAMPLE: {"emails":["john@stripe.com"]} -> verdict "valid", has_mx true, mail_provider "Google Workspace / Gmail".

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoOptional page size: items to return, integer 1-1000 (default 100). Example: 50
emailsYesRequired. 1-10000 strings, 1-320 chars each, one address per element; bare "jane@acme.com", "Jane <jane@acme.com>" and "mailto:jane@acme.com" forms accepted. Example: ["jane@acme.com","bob@gmial.com"]
offsetNoOptional zero-based number of items to skip, integer 0-1000000 (default 0); pass nextOffset from the previous response, e.g. 100
checkSpfDmarcNoOptional boolean, default true. true adds has_spf, has_dmarc and dmarc_policy (none|quarantine|reject) per domain; false skips those DNS lookups. Verdict and price are unaffected
allowDisposableNoOptional boolean, default false = disposable/temporary-inbox domains (mailinator.com, ...) get verdict "risky"; true stops penalising them
allowRoleAccountsNoOptional boolean, default true. false downgrades role mailboxes (info@, sales@, support@, ...) to verdict "risky"
allowFreeProvidersNoOptional boolean, default true. false downgrades free webmail (gmail.com, outlook.com, yahoo.com, ...) to "risky"; recommended for B2B lead lists

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
metaNoTool-specific context (summary counts, cost notes, ...)
countYesNumber of items in this page
itemsYesResult rows for this page
totalYesTotal items before paging
offsetYesOffset of the first item in this page
hasMoreYesTrue if more items exist after this page
nextOffsetYesOffset to pass for the next page, or null

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed7 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / allowDisposable / description
      Previous value: -"Default false (disposable = \"risky\")"New value: +"Optional boolean, default false = disposable/temporary-inbox domains (mailinator.com, ...) get verdict \"risky\"; true stops penalising them"
    • changedInput schema / properties / allowFreeProviders / description
      Previous value: -"Default true; false makes gmail.com etc. \"risky\" (B2B lists)"New value: +"Optional boolean, default true. false downgrades free webmail (gmail.com, outlook.com, yahoo.com, ...) to \"risky\"; recommended for B2B lead lists"
    • changedInput schema / properties / allowRoleAccounts / description
      Previous value: -"Default true; false makes role addresses \"risky\""New value: +"Optional boolean, default true. false downgrades role mailboxes (info@, sales@, support@, ...) to verdict \"risky\""
    • changedInput schema / properties / checkSpfDmarc / description
      Previous value: -"Also report SPF/DMARC (default true)"New value: +"Optional boolean, default true. true adds has_spf, has_dmarc and dmarc_policy (none|quarantine|reject) per domain; false skips those DNS lookups. Verdict and price are unaffected"
    • changedInput schema / properties / emails / description
      Previous value: -"Required. 1-10000 addresses (<= 320 chars each); \"Name <addr>\" and \"mailto:\" forms accepted. Example: [\"jane@acme.com\",\"bob@gmial.com\"]"New value: +"Required. 1-10000 strings, 1-320 chars each, one address per element; bare \"jane@acme.com\", \"Jane <jane@acme.com>\" and \"mailto:jane@acme.com\" forms accepted. Example: [\"jane@acme.com\",\"bob@gmial.com\"]"
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Previous value: -"Page size: items to return, integer 1-1000 (default 100)"New value: +"Optional page size: items to return, integer 1-1000 (default 100). Example: 50"
    • changedInput schema / properties / offset / description
      Previous value: -"Items to skip for paging, integer >= 0 (default 0); pass nextOffset from the previous response"New value: +"Optional zero-based number of items to skip, integer 0-1000000 (default 0); pass nextOffset from the previous response, e.g. 100"
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare read-only/open-world/idempotent; the description adds materially: no email is sent, live-DNS dependence, network calls via an Apify Actor in the caller's account, seconds-to-minutes latency with a 300s timeout, consolidated error codes (APIFY_TOKEN_MISSING, PAYMENT_REQUIRED, etc.), and repeated billing on every call including offset-only changes. Nothing here contradicts readOnlyHint/idempotentHint.

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?

The WHAT/WHEN/WHEN NOT/COST/RETURNS/BEHAVIOR/PARAMETERS/EXAMPLE layout is strongly front-loaded and scannable. It is long, but the length is justified by seven parameters, paid billing, and error semantics; only minor repetition (a few restated 'free'/'paid' points) could be trimmed.

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 an output schema present, return values need not be spelled out, yet the RETURNS line still orients the agent on paged 'email' rows versus 'error' rows. Combined with cost, latency, timeout, and paging/billing caveats, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is already 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description goes well beyond it: it explains that list/"Name <addr>" forms are split and deduplicated so you pay once per unique address, that allow* flags only downgrade to 'risky' and can never rescue a truly invalid address, that reason codes appear in reasons[] regardless of flags, gives typical B2B/consumer presets, and clarifies checkSpfDmarc affects fields but not verdict or price.

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 WHAT line names the exact Actor (email-validator-mx-disposable), enumerates every check performed, and states the output verdict set. It is immediately distinguishable from siblings like email_check_syntax and trust_screen_lead, which it explicitly names and contrasts.

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?

WHEN gives the selecting condition (only when MX/DNS matters, e.g. list cleaning or lead-domain verification) and WHEN NOT names the alternatives, email_check_syntax for offline format/typo work and trust_screen_lead for leads needing sanctions screening. It also prescribes pre-filtering to avoid paying for obviously bad rows.

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