A
licenseNot graded
qualityF
maintenanceA Model Context Protocol (MCP) server for dnstwist, a powerful DNS fuzzing tool that helps detect typosquatting, phishing, and corporate espionage.
21 npm
51
MIT
mcp-dns
by tudadada
mcp-dns
Model Context Protocol (MCP) server for deep DNS resolution, nameserver propagation, and DNSSEC validation.
âš¡ Core Capabilities
resolve_dns: Resolve DNS records (A, AAAA, MX, TXT, NS, CNAME) for any host
Planned Ecosystem Sub-Branches
mcp-dns-lookupmcp-dns-recordsmcp-dns-propagation
Related MCP server: Domain Tools MCP Server
🚀 Quick Start (Running with AI Clients)
Claude Desktop Integration
Add this configuration snippet to your claude_desktop_config.json:
{
"mcpServers": {
"dns": {
"command": "npx",
"args": ["-y", "mcp-dns"]
}
}
}Cursor IDE Integration
Add as a new stdio transport server:
Command:
npx -y mcp-dns
📦 Local Usage
npx mcp-dns📄 License
MIT License. Designed and maintained for the global Model Context Protocol ecosystem.
Available Tools
1 toolresolve_dnsA
Resolve DNS records (A, AAAA, MX, TXT, NS, CNAME) for any host
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| hostname | Yes | The hostname or domain to resolve |
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 does make the read-only lookup nature clear and enumerates record types, but it does not disclose behavior for missing records, invalid hostnames, or the exact shape of results. This is adequate but not rich.
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 sentence contains the action, resource, supported record types, and scope with no filler. The most important information is front-loaded and every word earns its place.
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 simple one-parameter DNS lookup tool with no siblings, the description covers the operation and supported record types. Without an output schema, additional detail about empty results or error cases would be slightly helpful, but the definition is largely complete for its complexity.
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% and the only parameter, hostname, has its own description. The tool description adds 'any host' and record-type context but no meaningful parameter detail beyond the schema, matching the baseline for fully schema-documented parameters.
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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Resolve DNS records' and explicitly lists the supported record types. It is immediately clear what action is performed on what target, and there are no sibling tools causing ambiguity.
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?
'For any host' provides clear usage context, indicating this is a general-purpose DNS lookup tool. There are no sibling tools or alternatives to contrast, so the absence of an explicit exclusion clause is not a significant gap.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
1 tool update
v1.0.0- First observed
resolve_dns
TDQS
A4.1/5.0
Scored across 1 tool
Disambiguation5/5
With only one tool, there is no possibility of overlapping purposes. The tool's purpose is singular and unambiguous.
Naming Consistency5/5
The single tool follows the verb_noun pattern (resolve_dns), which is clear and consistent. With only one tool, there are no conflicting conventions.
Tool Count3/5
A single tool for DNS resolution is minimal but functional. It feels slightly thin for a server, but the one tool does cover the primary domain adequately.
Completeness4/5
The tool covers common record types (A, AAAA, MX, TXT, NS, CNAME) but omits less common types like PTR, SRV, or SOA. This is a minor gap for most DNS use cases.
Maintenance
ActivityMaintained
ResponsivenessNo issues
Related MCP Connectors
MCP server for DNSimple — domains, DNS zone records, availability, pricing and contacts.
Public MCP server for summaries, DNS lookup, catalog, replies, and JSON checks.
DNS MCP — DNS and network lookup tools
Live DNS: dig any public resolver, audit a domain, walk a delegation, read the resolver board.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that provides comprehensive domain analysis capabilities including WHOIS lookups, DNS record queries, and DNS health checking.14MIT
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that provides comprehensive domain name research tools, including RDAP, WHOIS, and DNS query functionality.12Apache 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceMCP server for DNS lookups, reverse DNS, WHOIS, and domain checks. Zero auth, zero config.555 npm3MIT