Skip to main content
Glama

Name Whisper — ENS Intelligence Layer

by ai.namewhisper

get_expiring_names

Read-only

List ENS names by lifecycle window — THE tool for "which names are in premium / on Dutch auction", "names in grace period", "what's expiring soon / about to drop". Statuses:

  • premium: 90-111 days past expiry, registerable NOW at a decaying premium. Each result includes premiumUsd (decay-curve estimate) and, when the on-chain read landed, premiumEth + firstYearEth (live rentPrice).

  • grace: 0-90 days past expiry. NOT registerable — only renewable.

  • active: registered, expiring within days (they will drop into grace, then premium). Grace/premium results are validated against on-chain state, so renewed or already-released names are filtered out — statuses here are reliable, unlike the coarse EXPIRED flag in search results. Supports length/charType/category/dictionary filters. Use search_ens_names for pattern/price/theme queries instead. SCOPE: every row here has an EXISTING registration moving through a lifecycle window. This tool cannot answer "what is available / unregistered / free to register" in general — those names have no lease to expire, so they are not in this dataset at all. Route "which X are available to register" to search_ens_names, even when X is a digit pattern. Only send a query here when it names a lifecycle window (premium / Dutch auction / grace / expiring soon); "registerable NOW" in the premium line describes that one window, not availability at large. The length/charType filters and sortBy do NOT make this the tool for a plain pattern list: "3-letter numbers sorted by name", "4-letter words", "5-digit names" name no lifecycle window and belong to search_ens_names — sending them here returns a grace/premium dump the user did not ask for.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoFor status "active"/"all": look-ahead window in days (default 30).
limitNoMax results (default 25, max 100)
sortByNoSort order (default expires ascending — closest to dropping first). "grade" = best expected auction outcome first; use it for "which premium names are worth the most / best opportunities".
statusNoLifecycle window: "premium" = in the 21-day post-grace Dutch auction (registerable at a decaying premium), "grace" = 0-90d past expiry (NOT registerable, holder can renew), "active" = registered names expiring within `days`, "all" = any of these.premium
categoryNoCollection slug filter (e.g. "crypto-terms", "999-club")
charTypeNoCharacter composition filter. When this tool is the right one AND the request is for digits — "N-digit", "numeric", or a digit club (999 Club = 3-digit, 10K Club = 4-digit, 100K Club = 5-digit) — set this to "numbers", otherwise letter names of the same length pollute the results. This governs how to FILL this parameter, not whether to call this tool: digit phrasing on its own is not a reason to choose get_expiring_names over search_ens_names.
minGradeNoOnly names graded at least this well (A best). Combine with sortBy:"grade" for the shortlist.
maxLengthNoMaximum label length in CHARACTERS (see minLength note re digits).
minLengthNoMinimum label length in CHARACTERS. Length alone does NOT imply digits — a "4-digit" query needs charType:"numbers" too, or 4-letter names leak in.
dictionaryOnlyNoOnly dictionary words

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation covers safety, but the description adds genuinely behavioral evidence: grace/premium results are validated against on-chain state, renewed/already-released names are filtered out, and statuses are called 'reliable' in contrast to search's coarse EXPIRED flag. Also details returned premium fields so an agent knows what to expect.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The definition is long, but it is front-loaded with identity and statuses, and the scope section is placed after foundational content. It slightly over-trans receives the 'route to search_ens_names' warning, so it could be trimmed, but every section adds distinct value.

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?

With 10 parameters and no output schema, the description covers status meanings, filter applicability, a key nuance about digits and patterns, and even the reliability of returned data. This is enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly and to avoid common misuse.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful value by defining lifecycle semantics and explaining that length/charType filters do not make this the tool for pattern queries. That is real supplementary guidance, though much parameter detail still comes from 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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List ENS names by lifecycle window.' It immediately distinguishes itself from the broader search tools by naming the exact statuses it covers and sharply differentiates against search_ens_names.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use instructions with concrete alternative routing: pattern/price/theme queries go to search_ens_names, availability questions go there, and 'only send a query here when it names a lifecycle window.' This is model guidance, not just vague context.

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

All Name Whisper — ENS Intelligence Layer 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

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes with detailed descriptions, but some pairs (e.g., search_ens_names vs enumerate_entities, batch_purchase vs sweep) could cause confusion due to overlapping functionality. The descriptions help differentiate, but the large number of tools increases ambiguity risk.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names use consistent snake_case with a verb_noun pattern (e.g., get_name_details, set_ens_records, batch_create_listings). Naming conventions are uniform and predictable, making it easy to infer tool purpose from the name.

Tool Count4/5

With 44 tools, the server is quite comprehensive, covering a wide range of ENS operations. While this exceeds the typical 3-15 tool count, the scope of the domain (marketplace, registration, agent identity, etc.) justifies the number, and tools are well-organized into logical groups.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full lifecycle of ENS names: registration, renewal, wrapping, transfers, marketplace actions (listings, offers, purchases), record management, subnames, agent identity, and market intelligence. No obvious gaps are present for an ENS intelligence platform.

Resources