Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
pandadad0214

Panda Federation Tools

by pandadad0214
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

SPF, DKIM & DMARC Checker: Bulk Email Domain Security Audit

email_domain_security_checker
Read-only

Check SPF, DKIM, DMARC, MX, BIMI and MTA-STS for domains or emails, grade spoofing risk, and get plain-English fixes with Excel/CSV output.

Instructions

Use this to check SPF, DKIM, DMARC, MX provider, BIMI and MTA-STS for a list of domains or emails. Output: one row per domain with an A-F grade, spoofing risk, mail provider, senders and plain-English fixes, plus Excel and CSV.

Runs the Apify Actor pandadad0214/email-domain-security-checker (https://apify.com/pandadad0214/email-domain-security-checker) on your own Apify account. Price: $0.002 per domain checked. Runs that find nothing are not charged per result. Spending is capped per call by run_max_charge_usd.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainsNoDomains, emails or URLs. One per line: example.com, name@example.com or https://www.example.com/page all work (the domain is extracted, www. removed, duplicates dropped). Leave empty for a 3-domain demo.
maxDomainsNoMaximum domains. You pay per checked domain, so this also caps the cost. Whole number, 1 to 10,000; default 1,000.
dkimSelectorsNoExtra DKIM selectors. Optional. About 40 common selectors (google, selector1, selector2, k1, s1, s2, default…) are always tried. Add your own if you sign with a custom one, e.g. 20230601 or mailo.
run_max_itemsNoOptional. Most results to return from this call (default from PANDA_MAX_ITEMS, 50). Also limits how many results the Actor produces and charges for, unless you set its own max field.
run_timeout_secsNoOptional. Seconds to wait for results (default from PANDA_TIMEOUT_SECS, 120; max 300).
run_max_charge_usdNoOptional. Hard spending cap for this call in USD (default from PANDA_MAX_CHARGE_USD, 0.50).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.1

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing that it runs the Apify Actor pandadad0214/email-domain-security-checker on the caller's own Apify account, the per-domain price ($0.002), that empty runs are not charged per result, and that spend is capped by run_max_charge_usd. That billing/account context is exactly the costly, non-obvious behavior an agent needs before calling an openWorld tool.

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?

Purpose and output are front-loaded in the first sentence, then cost/execution detail, which is a sensible ordering. It is dense but slightly redundant, since the pricing and cap are stated again in the run_max_charge_usd schema entry.

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, but the description summarizes the return shape (per-domain rows, letter grade, risk, provider, senders, fixes, Excel/CSV), and it covers execution model, cost, and timeout behavior. For a zero-required-parameter bulk audit tool, nothing essential is missing.

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 every parameter is already documented in structured form, which sets the baseline at 3. The description adds little parameter-level meaning beyond restating the spend cap that already exists in run_max_charge_usd's schema description.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: check SPF, DKIM, DMARC, MX provider, BIMI and MTA-STS for a list of domains or emails. It also describes the shape of the result (one row per domain with an A-F grade, spoofing risk, provider, senders, fixes), so the agent knows exactly what it gets back. None of the listed siblings overlap, so no explicit differentiation is needed.

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?

"Use this to check ... for a list of domains or emails" gives a clear triggering context, and the empty-input behavior (3-domain demo) tells the agent it can call without arguments. There is no explicit when-not guidance or named alternative, which keeps it from a 5.

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