Technitium MCP Secure

dns_allow_domain

Whitelist a domain to bypass block lists and resolve false positives in DNS filtering.

Instructions

Allow a domain name, bypassing any block lists. Useful for whitelisting false positives.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`domain`	Yes	Domain name to allow (e.g. plex.direct)

Implementation Reference

src/tools/blocking.ts:85-111 (handler)

The handler function for dns_allow_domain tool. It validates the domain via validateDomain, calls /api/allowed/add on the TechnitiumClient, and returns a success response.

definition: {
  name: "dns_allow_domain",
  description:
    "Allow a domain name, bypassing any block lists. Useful for whitelisting false positives.",
  inputSchema: {
    type: "object",
    properties: {
      domain: {
        type: "string",
        description: "Domain name to allow (e.g. plex.direct)",
      },
    },
    required: ["domain"],
  },
},
readonly: false,
handler: async (args) => {
  const domain = validateDomain(args.domain as string);
  const data = await client.callOrThrow("/api/allowed/add", {
    domain,
  });
  return JSON.stringify(
    { success: true, allowed: domain, ...data },
    null,
    2
  );
},

src/tools/blocking.ts:84-99 (schema)

The input schema for dns_allow_domain, defining a required 'domain' string parameter.

{
  definition: {
    name: "dns_allow_domain",
    description:
      "Allow a domain name, bypassing any block lists. Useful for whitelisting false positives.",
    inputSchema: {
      type: "object",
      properties: {
        domain: {
          type: "string",
          description: "Domain name to allow (e.g. plex.direct)",
        },
      },
      required: ["domain"],
    },
  },

src/tools/index.ts:7-7 (registration)
Import of blockingTools which contains the dns_allow_domain tool.
```
import { blockingTools } from "./blocking.js";
```
src/tools/index.ts:20-20 (registration)
Spread of blockingTools into getAllTools array, registering dns_allow_domain.
```
...blockingTools(client),
```

src/rate-limit.ts:32-39 (helper)

Rate limiting configuration for dns_allow_domain (mutateLimits: 10 requests per 60s window).

for (const tool of [
  "dns_create_zone", "dns_add_record", "dns_update_record",
  "dns_block_domain", "dns_allow_domain",
  "dns_remove_allowed", "dns_remove_blocked", "dns_delete_cached",
  "dns_enable_zone", "dns_disable_zone", "dns_set_zone_options",
  "dns_set_settings", "dns_install_app",
]) {
  this.toolLimits.set(tool, mutateLimits);

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.0Feb 12, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the core effect (bypasses block lists) and implies whitelisting, but does not state reversibility, side effects, or permission requirements. This is a modest but incomplete disclosure.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers what it does and when to use it. However, it could mention related operations (e.g., removal via dns_remove_allowed) for fuller context. Still, given the simplicity, it is largely complete.

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 schema already provides full coverage (100%) for the single parameter with an example ('e.g. plex.direct'). The description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 verb 'Allow' and resource 'domain name', and specifies the effect 'bypassing any block lists'. This distinguishes it from siblings like dns_block_domain and dns_remove_allowed.

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?

Provides clear usage context: 'Useful for whitelisting false positives.' This indicates when to use the tool, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it does not reach a 5.

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