Check whether domain names can be registered through Vee3 (Namecheap-backed).
Returns a map of each requested domain name to a boolean: true when the domain is available for purchase through Vee3, false when it is not.
Cost = 5 tokens.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| domains | Yes | Domain names to check (maximum 10). |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return format (map of domain to boolean), the meaning of true/false, and the token cost. It does not note any side effects (none expected) or limitations (e.g., TLD support), but the core behavior is transparent.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, return behavior, and cost. No redundancy or fluff. The description is well-structured and front-loaded with the primary purpose.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool is simple with one well-described parameter and an output schema. The description covers purpose, return format, and cost. It lacks mention of edge cases (e.g., invalid domains) but is complete enough for the agent to select and invoke correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% and the parameter is simple (array of domains). The description adds the return semantics but does not add detail about domain name format or constraints beyond what schema already states. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states a specific action ('Check whether domain names can be registered') and identifies the resource (domain names) and provider (Vee3/Namecheap). It distinguishes from sibling tools like domains.lookup or domains.whois by focusing on registration availability.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description makes the use case obvious (determining if a domain can be registered through Vee3) and implies this is a precursor to registration. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, though the context is sufficient.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a distinct purpose, further clarified by group prefixes and clear descriptions. Within each group, tools perform different operations (e.g., domains.lookup vs. domains.whois vs. domains.rdap) with no ambiguity.
All tools follow a consistent group.tool_name pattern using snake_case. The naming is predictable and uniformly applied across all groups.
78 tools is high, but the server aggregates multiple distinct API domains (11 groups). Each group has a reasonable number of tools, typically under 10, with TikTok having 17. The count reflects breadth, not bloat.
Each domain's tool set covers the primary expected operations (e.g., search, details, reviews, metrics, user info). There are no obvious gaps for read-only analytical use; features like posting are likely out of scope.
