Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
grid402-mcp

grid402-mcp

by oliveiratc
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Remote

grid402_dns

Resolves authoritative A, AAAA, MX, TXT, NS, and CNAME DNS records for any internet domain, with optional Base Mainnet payment verification.

Instructions

Executa resolução DNS autoritativa de registros A, AAAA, MX, TXT, NS e CNAME para qualquer domínio da internet.

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>"
    },
    "name": "grid402_dns"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesNome do domínio a ser consultado (ex: "github.com", "base.org").
payment_tx_hashNoHash opcional de transação na Base Mainnet com 0.0005 USDC.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Autoritativa' hints that queries go to authoritative nameservers rather than a recursive cache, which is useful, but the description says nothing about the payment/credential requirement, latency, rate limits, failure modes (NXDOMAIN, timeouts), or what a response contains.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the record types and domain scope are stated up front and nothing is repeated from the schema.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple read-style lookup with a fully documented two-parameter schema, the description covers the core purpose adequately. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it should have disclosed the paid-transaction precondition and roughly what the resolution returns; those gaps are material for correct invocation.

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%, so both parameters (domain and payment_tx_hash) are already documented in the input schema with examples. The description adds no further meaning about either parameter, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a specific verb and resource ('resolução DNS autoritativa') plus the exact record types covered (A, AAAA, MX, TXT, NS, CNAME) and the scope ('qualquer domínio da internet'), so an agent can tell it apart from grid402_ssl or grid402_asn by subject matter. It stops short of explicitly naming a sibling or contrasting with one, which keeps it at 4 rather than 5.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to choose this tool over grid402_ssl, grid402_asn, or any other sibling, and no mention of prerequisites or exclusions. The one operational precondition that matters — the paid transaction on Base Mainnet — appears only in the schema, not in the description.

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