ドメイン番人
REMOTE · DOMAIN-BANNIN.JP · SCANNED SEP 20
ドメインの設定を調べる MCP サーバー。SPF / DKIM / DMARC・DNS・SSL 証明書・セキュリティヘッダ・サブドメイン・類似ドメインを、公開情報だけで確認します。登録不要・無料。
Available components
How this component scores in each security and reliability category. Every signal is checked automatically against the live server, and we only credit what we can confirm. How we score → Why this is hard to score →
Endpoint Security46
- The endpoint's TLS certificate is valid, in date, and uses a strong key. View diagnostics → Pass
- Authorisation not fully verified: no authorisation is required to call this server, and 1 tool(s) never declared a destructiveHint. The MCP spec treats an absent hint as destructive by default, so we cannot call this surface safe. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Unverified
- HTTPS check failed: the endpoint is reachable over plaintext HTTP. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- HSTS check failed: the Strict-Transport-Security header is absent. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- DNSSEC check failed: this domain isn't protected by DNSSEC. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
Transport & Reachability100
- Verified streamable-http transport via a live MCP handshake. View diagnostics → Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability80
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 246 tokens (~246/item across 1 items; 1 tools + 0 resources), over budget; trim descriptions and params. See how to fix → Fail
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management77
- Stability observed for 23 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage100
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 100% of tool parameters carry a description.Pass
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 1 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 1 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities40
- Spec-recency check failed: implements MCP spec 2025-03-26; the latest is 2026-07-28. See how to fix → Fail
How do I install the ドメイン番人 MCP server?
ドメイン番人 is a hosted endpoint at https://domain-bannin.jp/api/mcp, so there is nothing to install locally. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
remote · domain-bannin.jp
claude mcp add --transport http j-doi-domain-bannin 'https://domain-bannin.jp/api/mcp'
{
"mcpServers": {
"j-doi-domain-bannin": {
"url": "https://domain-bannin.jp/api/mcp"
}
}
} {
"servers": {
"j-doi-domain-bannin": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://domain-bannin.jp/api/mcp"
}
}
} [mcp_servers.j-doi-domain-bannin] url = "https://domain-bannin.jp/api/mcp"
{
"$schema": "https://opencode.ai/config.json",
"mcp": {
"j-doi-domain-bannin": {
"type": "remote",
"url": "https://domain-bannin.jp/api/mcp",
"enabled": true
}
}
} openclaw mcp add j-doi-domain-bannin --url 'https://domain-bannin.jp/api/mcp' --transport streamable-http
mcp_servers:
j-doi-domain-bannin:
url: "https://domain-bannin.jp/api/mcp" {
"McpServers": {
"j-doi-domain-bannin": {
"Transport": "http",
"Url": "https://domain-bannin.jp/api/mcp"
}
}
} assistant mcp add j-doi-domain-bannin -t streamable-http -u 'https://domain-bannin.jp/api/mcp'
{
"mcpServers": {
"j-doi-domain-bannin": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://domain-bannin.jp/api/mcp"
}
}
} The mcpServers block is a cross-client convention. Remote transports vary, so check your client's docs.
Every change we have recorded for this component, newest first. Security-relevant changes are always shown. ▲ marks a change for the better, ▼ a change for the worse; unmarked changes are neutral.
- 19 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 70 to 73. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 21 days of observed history at the previous scan, 22 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 17 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 63 to 67. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 19 days of observed history at the previous scan, 20 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 15 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 57 to 60. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 17 days of observed history at the previous scan, 18 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 13 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 50 to 53. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 15 days of observed history at the previous scan, 16 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 11 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 43 to 47. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 13 days of observed history at the previous scan, 14 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 8 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 33 to 37. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 10 days of observed history at the previous scan, 11 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 6 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 27 to 30. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 8 days of observed history at the previous scan, 9 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 4 Sept 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 20 to 23. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 6 days of observed history at the previous scan, 7 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
Diagnostic detail from the automated scan of this channel: what the scanner observed at each step, so you can see exactly where a check passed or failed. It is informational only and never changes the trust score.
Captured 20 Sept 2026 · Probed https://domain-bannin.jp/api/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=domain-bannin.jp | CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US | 25 Aug 2026 | 23 Nov 2026 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA256 | 911357c9482d18570e0baa47276d7432 |
| SANs: domain-bannin.jp | ||||||
| CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US (CA) | CN=GTS Root R4,O=Google Trust Services LLC,C=US | 13 Dec 2023 | 20 Feb 2029 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 7ff31977972c224a76155d13b6d685e3 |
| CN=GTS Root R4,O=Google Trust Services LLC,C=US (CA) | CN=GlobalSign Root CA,OU=Root CA,O=GlobalSign nv-sa,C=BE | 15 Nov 2023 | 28 Jan 2028 | ECDSA 384 | SHA256-RSA | 7fe530bf331343bedd821610493d8a1b |
Background: What to check on a remote MCP endpoint →
DNSSEC insecure
Validation of domain-bannin.jp. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| jp. | present | 33631 | 8 | Verified |
| domain-bannin.jp. | absent | Unsigned (proven) parent-signed NSEC/NSEC3 proves an unsigned delegation |
Authentication No authorisation required
The endpoint answered without asking for a token. Anyone who knows the URL can reach it.
| Result | No authorisation required |
|---|---|
| HTTP status | 200 |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://domain-bannin.jp/api/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://domain-bannin.jp/api/mcp | Served over HTTP | 200 |
The tools this component advertises to a client, with an estimated token cost for each. Expand a tool to see its parameters and schema. The per-tool counts are indicative and are not scored directly; the schema's total context footprint is one signal in Schema Quality & AI Usability. A tool's description is untrusted text the model reads on every call, which is what makes this list a security surface and not just an inventory: how tool poisoning works →
domain_diagnose Domain Health Diagnose ~246
Runs a comprehensive health check on a public domain: SPF / DKIM / DMARC for the headline score, plus optional details on email-auth adjacent records (MX, BIMI, MTA-STS, TLS-RPT, DKIM key length), DNS infrastructure (NS, DNSSEC, CAA, AAAA, SOA, TXT), web security (HTTPS, certificate, HSTS, HTTP/2-3, CT log), domain registration (RDAP expiry, registrar lock, DS chain), and brand protection (typosquatting, TLD parity). Returns a structured report with per-category scores, individual diagnostic items, and a `critical_issues` cross-cut summary. No authentication required.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| domain | string | yes | Domain to diagnose, e.g. `example.co.jp`. A URL, an email address, a trailing dot, a port, or an internationalised name are all accepted and resolved to the registrable host — `https://日本語.jp/path`,… |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
What is the ドメイン番人 MCP server?
ドメイン番人 is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.j-doi/domain-bannin. ドメインの設定を調べる MCP サーバー。SPF / DKIM / DMARC・DNS・SSL 証明書・セキュリティヘッダ・サブドメイン・類似ドメインを、公開情報だけで確認します。登録不要・無料。 This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://domain-bannin.jp/api/mcp).
Is the ドメイン番人 MCP server safe to use?
ドメイン番人 scores 69 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. That is a record of what we were able to check automatically, not an endorsement. The category breakdown on this page shows every signal behind the number, including the ones we could not confirm.
What tools does the ドメイン番人 MCP server expose?
ドメイン番人 exposes 1 tool: domain_diagnose. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 246 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the ドメイン番人 MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to ドメイン番人 without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the ドメイン番人 MCP server still maintained?
ドメイン番人 is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 20 September 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.