Skip to main content
Glama

Name Whisper — ENS Intelligence Layer

by ai.namewhisper
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

make_offer

Place an offer (bid) on a registered ENS name on NameWhisper via Seaport 1.6.

Returns an unsigned Seaport OrderComponents payload (plus EIP-712 domain/types) that the caller's wallet signs. The buyer offers WETH and receives the name on acceptance. After signing, POST { orderComponents, signature, label, orderType: 'offer', variant: 'nw' } to https://namewhisper.ai/api/orderbook/submit (authenticated) to store the offer in NameWhisper's orderbook — the owner sees it and can accept, counter, or decline.

Offers settle in WETH: the maker needs wrapped ETH and an approval for Seaport to spend it (the NameWhisper UI handles this approval automatically at signing time).

Fee structure: 1% marketplace fee baked into the order as a Seaport consideration item.

NW-native only — offers are not cross-posted to other marketplaces.

Tip: Use get_valuation first to understand fair market value before making an offer.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesENS name to make an offer on (e.g. "coffee.eth")
currencyNoOffer currency. Seaport offers settle in WETH; ETH is treated as WETH.WETH
amountEthYesOffer amount in ETH (placed on-chain as WETH)
expiryHoursNoOffer expiry in hours (default: 72, at most 8760: one year)
walletAddressYesYour wallet address (the offer maker / buyer)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / expiryHours / description
      Previous value: -"Offer expiry in hours (default: 72)"New value: +"Offer expiry in hours (default: 72, at most 8760: one year)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / expiryHours / maximum
      Previous value: -9007199254740991New value: +8760
  2. Changed10 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / amountEth / description
      Previous value: -"Offer amount in ETH"New value: +"Offer amount in ETH (placed on-chain as WETH)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / amountEth / exclusiveMinimum
      Added value: +0
    • changedInput schema / properties / currency / description
      Previous value: -"Payment currency (default: WETH)"New value: +"Offer currency. Seaport offers settle in WETH; ETH is treated as WETH."
    • changedInput schema / properties / currency / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "WETH",
-  "USDC",
-  "DAI"
-]New value: +[
+  "WETH",
+  "ETH"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / expiryHours / exclusiveMinimum
      Added value: +0
    • addedInput schema / properties / expiryHours / maximum
      Added value: +9007199254740991
    • changedInput schema / properties / expiryHours / type
      Previous value: -"number"New value: +"integer"
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / minLength
      Added value: +1
    • changedInput schema / properties / walletAddress / description
      Previous value: -"Your wallet address (offer maker)"New value: +"Your wallet address (the offer maker / buyer)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / walletAddress / pattern
      Added value: +"^0x[a-fA-F0-9]{40}$"
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false). The description adds substantial extra context: the return is an unsigned payload needing a wallet signature, the maker needs wrapped ETH plus a Seaport approval, there is a 1% fee baked in as a consideration item, the submit endpoint is authenticated, and offers are NW-native only.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and return shape, then flow, fees, and scope in short paragraphs. Slightly long for a five-parameter tool, but every paragraph carries distinct information (signing flow, submit endpoint, approval, fee, scope).

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by explaining exactly what is returned (unsigned Seaport OrderComponents plus EIP-712 domain/types) and what the caller must do next. With annotations covering the safety profile and the schema covering parameters, nothing material is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all five parameters (name, currency, amountEth, expiryHours, walletAddress) are already documented in the schema, including the WETH/ETH equivalence and the expiry cap. The description adds only that settlement is in WETH and that the maker needs an approval, which is behavioral rather than parameter-level detail.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Place an offer (bid) on a registered ENS name') and names the mechanism (Seaport 1.6) plus the venue (NameWhisper), which distinguishes it from create_listing, accept_offer, and purchase_name.

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?

Gives clear context: it must be followed by signing and a POST to the orderbook submit endpoint, the owner can accept/counter/decline, and it tips using get_valuation first. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like create_listing or accept_offer, so it falls short of a full when/when-not statement.

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
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources