Dechonet MCP

ASN / BGP Lookup

asn_lookup

Read-onlyIdempotent

Identify the network operator, announced prefixes, abuse contact, and classification (cloud, CDN, ISP, hosting, enterprise) for any IP or AS number. Use this to determine who runs the network.

Instructions

Look up Autonomous System (ASN) / BGP information for an IP address or AS number: the network operator, announced prefixes, abuse contact, and a classification (cloud, CDN, ISP, hosting, or enterprise). Use this to identify who runs a network or whether an IP is cloud/CDN-hosted. Use reverse_dns instead for the host-level PTR name of a single IP. Read-only; requires no API key; rate-limited. Returns operator, prefixes, classification, and abuse contact.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes	An IP address (e.g., '1.1.1.1') or an AS number in 'AS####' form (e.g., 'AS13335').

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`kpis`	No	Key metrics as label/value pairs
`grade`	No	Letter grade (A+ to F) when the tool grades the target
`score`	No	0-100 score when the tool scores the target
`issues`	No	Detected problems, severity-rated
`status`	Yes	Overall verdict, e.g. 'good' \| 'warning' \| 'bad' \| 'info' \| 'unknown'
`actions`	No	Recommended next actions, most important first
`summary`	No	One-paragraph interpretation of the result
`reportUrl`	Yes	Human-facing interactive report for this exact lookup on dechonet.com

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.1.0Sep 8, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "actions": {
+      "description": "Recommended next actions, most important first",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "grade": {
+      "description": "Letter grade (A+ to F) when the tool grades the target",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "issues": {
+      "description": "Detected problems, severity-rated",
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "key": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "severity": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "severity",
+          "key"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "kpis": {
+      "description": "Key metrics as label/value pairs",
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "label": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "value": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "label",
+          "value"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "reportUrl": {
+      "description": "Human-facing interactive report for this exact lookup on dechonet.com",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "score": {
+      "description": "0-100 score when the tool scores the target",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "description": "Overall verdict, e.g. 'good' | 'warning' | 'bad' | 'info' | 'unknown'",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "summary": {
+      "description": "One-paragraph interpretation of the result",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "status",
+    "reportUrl"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.3Jun 17, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / query / description

Previous value: -"ASN (e.g., AS13335) or IP address"New value: +"An IP address (e.g., '1.1.1.1') or an AS number in 'AS####' form (e.g., 'AS13335')."

First observedv0.1.0Jun 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses rate-limiting and no-API-key requirement, which are not present in the annotations. It also reiterates read-only behavior consistent with the readOnlyHint. This goes beyond the annotations to inform the agent of operational constraints.

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 description is front-loaded with the action and key information, but it repeats the return fields (operator, prefixes, classification, abuse contact) twice. It is not overly verbose, but could be slightly more concise by removing the duplication.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and a clear output schema, the description provides all necessary context: what it returns, when to use it, and how it differs from related tools. It is complete without needing to explain nested objects or complex error cases.

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?

The parameter 'query' is already well described in the schema with examples for IP and ASN formats. The description does not add additional semantic details about the parameter beyond what is already in the schema, so it meets the baseline for full 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: looking up ASN/BGP information for an IP or AS number, including operator, prefixes, abuse contact, and classification. It explicitly distinguishes itself from reverse_dns, making its purpose unambiguous among siblings.

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?

The description provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use this to identify who runs a network or whether an IP is cloud/CDN-hosted' and contrasts with reverse_dns for PTR lookups. It also mentions read-only nature and rate-limiting, which helps set expectations for usage.

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

Deploy Server