Skip to main content
Glama

vibedeploy

by be.vibedeploy

Check domain availability and indicative price

check_domain_availability
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check whether a domain can be registered and get an INDICATIVE retail price. IMPORTANT: this is a read-only lookup — it does NOT buy, register, reserve, or pay for any domain, and it changes nothing. The returned price is GROSS (includes 21% VAT) and indicative only. Set alternatives:true to also check the same name across other common TLDs (be, com, net, eu, nl, io, dev, app). Requires a valid team token but is not tied to a specific site.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesThe domain to check, e.g. "example.com".
alternativesNoWhen true, also check the same second-level name across a canonical TLD set (be, com, net, eu, nl, io, dev, app) and return each one's availability + indicative price.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noteYesReminder that this is an indicative gross price and not a purchase.
domainYes
currencyYesISO currency code for the price (e.g. EUR).
availableYesWhether the domain can be registered right now.
priceCentsYesGross (incl. 21% VAT) indicative retail price in cents, or null if unavailable / no price is published.
request_idNoServer-assigned request correlation id. Quote it when contacting support.
alternativesNoPresent only when alternatives:true was requested.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / request_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Server-assigned request correlation id. Quote it when contacting support.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. The description adds critical details: the price is indicative, gross (21% VAT), and the exact list of TLDs for alternatives. No contradictions.

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?

The description is three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and every sentence provides essential information without redundancy. Perfectly concise.

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?

For a simple two-parameter tool, the description covers purpose, behavioral caveats, parameter usage, and authentication context. It leaves no gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the description enriches parameters by specifying the exact TLD list for 'alternatives' and providing an example for 'domain'. This adds value beyond the schema.

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 explicitly states the verb 'check' and the resource 'domain availability with indicative price', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that perform mutations like 'add_custom_domain' or 'deploy_site'.

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?

The description clarifies this is a read-only lookup, does not register domains, and explains when to use the 'alternatives' parameter. It also mentions token requirements. However, it does not explicitly contrast with other tools, but the sibling set makes the distinction clear.

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

All vibedeploy toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target a distinct resource and action—deploy, file, domain, snapshot, form, analytics—and the descriptions carefully clarify overlap (e.g., deploy_site vs update_site vs begin_deploy). A few pairs like read_file/read_source_file or list_file_hashes/list_source_files could be confused, but the pattern is clear enough to avoid misselection.

Naming Consistency5/5

Every tool follows a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (add_, list_, get_, read_, update_, delete_, verify_, etc.), with singular verbs for single resources and plural verbs for batches. This makes the surface highly predictable.

Tool Count2/5

39 tools is well beyond the typical well-scoped surface and many could be consolidated (e.g., read_file/read_files/read_source_file/read_source_files, or the multiple deploy entry points). The broad domain explains some of the count, but the set feels bloated and will slow tool selection.

Completeness3/5

The core deploy lifecycle is well covered: create/read/update/delete sites, patch files, manage custom domains, and configure forms. However, there are notable gaps—snapshots can be created and listed but not restored or deleted, and there is no explicit rollback-to-previous-deploy mechanism, which are common expectations for a deployment platform.

Resources