Skip to main content
Glama
oborseth

Official Porkbun MCP Server

by oborseth
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Preflight Domain

preflight_domain
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check if a planned domain change will break DNS or email before making it. Run this read-only preflight before moving nameservers, transferring out, or enabling DNSSEC.

Instructions

Ask whether a change is about to break a domain, BEFORE making it. Read-only, free, and the right thing to call before changing nameservers, transferring a domain out, or enabling DNSSEC.

Every check comes from a real incident, so these are the failures where a zone looks fine and stops working anyway. Read blockers first — those will break something. warnings will not break outright but are usually what the user notices next. safe is true only when both are empty. Each check names the rule it comes from and carries a next_action, so you can explain the finding rather than just report it.

The two an agent should treat as hard stops:

  • dnssec-active — DS records are published at the registry, so new nameservers will serve answers that do not match them and validating resolvers will refuse the WHOLE zone. The domain goes dark rather than degrading. DNSSEC has to be removed and the DS TTL waited out BEFORE the nameservers change. Never move delegation past this one.

  • spf-duplicate / spf-lookups — RFC 7208 permerrors that make SPF fail for every sender, so the domain's mail is already being degraded whether or not the user has noticed.

Check nameservers-ours before you read anything else: it says whether this zone is what the world resolves at all. A domain delegated to another provider still accepts every DNS write here and none of them take effect, and the mixed case (some of the delegated nameservers are Porkbun's, some are not) means resolvers disagree query to query.

The one worth explaining because nobody expects it: wildcard-shadowed. Under RFC 4592 a wildcard answers only names that do NOT exist in the zone, so a name holding just an MX or TXT record stops inheriting the wildcard's address and stops resolving — with nothing in the zone looking wrong.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesDomain to check, e.g. `example.com`
intentNoWhat you are about to do; scopes the checks. Defaults to general, which runs everything applicable.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.39.4

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, but the description adds substantial operational context: output sections (blockers, warnings, safe), hard-stop checks with real consequences, nameserver delegation gotchas, and DNSSEC/SPF failure modes. This is rich behavioral disclosure beyond structured fields.

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 long, but for a high-stakes preflight tool with several hard-stop failure modes, most detail earns its place. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and then structured into output interpretation, hard stops, and notable edge cases.

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?

There is no output schema, yet the description explains the return shape (`blockers`, `warnings`, `safe`, `next_action`) and how to interpret it. Combined with the annotations and schema, it gives the agent enough context to call and reason about the tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameter documentation is already carried by the schema. The description reinforces intent-related use cases by naming the operations that map to the intent enum, but it does not add syntax, defaults, or meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states a specific purpose: preflight whether an upcoming domain change is about to break something, before making it. It names the relevant operations (changing nameservers, transferring out, enabling DNSSEC), which clearly distinguishes it from mutation siblings like update_nameservers and transfer_domain.

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?

It gives clear when-to-use guidance: call before changing nameservers, transferring a domain out, or enabling DNSSEC. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, but the usage context is strong and front-loaded.

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