Dechonet MCP

Open Port Scan

port_scan

Read-onlyIdempotent

Probe a host for open common TCP ports and confirm exposed services, reporting service names and response times.

Instructions

Probe a host for a fixed set of common TCP ports (HTTP, HTTPS, SSH, FTP, SMTP, DNS, and common databases) and report which are open, the service name, and the response time. BEHAVIOR: this makes an ACTIVE TCP connection to the target. It is non-intrusive — a connect probe only; it does not authenticate, send exploits, or transfer data — and changes nothing on the target (read-only), but the connection is visible in the target's logs, so only scan hosts you own or are explicitly authorized to test. Use this to confirm which services are exposed. Use ssl_check or http_security instead to assess a specific service's configuration. Requires no API key; rate-limited. Returns a per-port open/closed list with service names.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`host`	Yes	Hostname or IP to probe (e.g., 'example.com' or '203.0.113.10'). A 'host:port' form is accepted to hint a specific port. Only supply targets you own or are authorized to test.

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 / host / description

Previous value: -"Hostname or IP to scan (e.g., example.com or example.com:443)"New value: +"Hostname or IP to probe (e.g., 'example.com' or '203.0.113.10'). A 'host:port' form is accepted to hint a specific port. Only supply targets you own or are authorized to test."

First observedv0.1.0Jun 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description openly discloses that the tool makes an ACTIVE TCP connection, is non-intrusive, and that the connection is visible in target logs. This aligns with and expands on the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint false) without contradiction.

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 clear and well-structured but repeats the 'connect probe only' and authorization guidance multiple times. Slight redundancy, though it does not harm usability.

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?

Given the presence of an input schema, sibling tools, and usage notes, the description provides all necessary information for an agent to decide to invoke the tool and understand its effects. The output is described sufficiently for a list of open ports.

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?

The host parameter is fully described with examples, an accepted 'host:port' variant, and an authorization warning. Schema coverage is 100%, and the description adds practical usage context beyond the schema.

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 action ('Probe a host for a fixed set of common TCP ports'), the scope ('fixed set'), and the output ('report which are open, the service name, and the response time'). It also distinguishes itself by naming sibling tools for specific service configuration checks, making its purpose unique.

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 tells when to use the tool ('Use this to confirm which services are exposed') and when not to use it ('Use ssl_check or http_security instead to assess a specific service's configuration'). This gives clear selection criteria.

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

Deploy Server