porkbun-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

dns_get

Read-only

Fetch a single DNS record by its ID for any domain. Pass the domain and record ID to retrieve exact record details for management or verification.

Instructions

Get a specific DNS record by ID.

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": {
      "domain": "<domain>",
      "record_id": "<record_id>"
    },
    "name": "dns_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`domain`	Yes	Domain name (e.g., 'example.com')
`record_id`	Yes	DNS record ID

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Record ID
`ttl`	Yes	Time to live in seconds
`name`	Yes	Full record name (e.g., www.example.com)
`type`	Yes	Record type (A, AAAA, MX, etc.)
`notes`	No	Optional notes
`content`	Yes	Record content
`priority`	No	Priority (MX, SRV only)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.2Aug 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds no additional behavioral context beyond what the schema provides. It does not mention error handling, the necessity of a domain context beyond the schema's required fields, or response characteristics. The description is essentially redundant with the schema, offering minimal extra transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant language. Every word earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple get-by-ID tool with an output schema, full schema coverage, and read-only annotations, the description is adequate. It does not explain return values, but the output schema covers that. The lack of explicit alternative guidance is a minor gap, but overall completeness is high.

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% for both domain and record_id. The description's phrase 'by ID' reinforces the role of record_id but adds no new meaning beyond the schema. It meets the baseline for tools with high schema coverage.

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 description clearly states the tool's function: 'Get a specific DNS record by ID.' The verb 'Get' and resource 'DNS record' are specific, and the qualifier 'by ID' distinguishes it from sibling tools like dns_list and dns_get_by_name_type.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies use when a record ID is known (i.e., 'by ID') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like dns_get_by_name_type, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites. Usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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