Skip to main content
Glama

Name Whisper — ENS Intelligence Layer

by ai.namewhisper

manage_ens_name

Read-only

One-shot management report for an ENS name. This is the ONLY tool you need to answer "management report", "full overview", "health check", "status check", "what should I do about X", or "tell me what to do with X" queries. Prefer this over calling get_name_details + get_valuation separately — this tool is purpose-built for status/recommendation queries and returns the full picture in one call.

Returns:

  • Registration status (active, expiring soon, grace period, premium auction, expired, available)

  • Exact expiry date and days remaining

  • Whether the name is wrapped (NameWrapper) or unwrapped (BaseRegistrar)

  • Current owner address

  • On-chain renewal pricing

  • Ranked recommended actions based on current status (renew now, migrate to wrapper, etc.)

Distinct from get_name_details (which returns owner/listings/offers without a recommendation engine). Use this for "what should I do" queries; use get_name_details only if you need marketplace data (active listings, offers) which this tool does not include.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesENS name to check (e.g. "coffee.eth")
includeRenewalPricingNoInclude on-chain renewal pricing (default: true)

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

ReadOnlyHint=true is matched by description stating it's a report. Discloses that it aggregates data and returns recommendations, which is beyond annotations. Slight room to mention idempotency, but satisfactory.

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?

Well-structured with a clear first sentence, usage guidance, and enumerated returns. Slightly lengthy but each part adds 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?

Despite no output schema, description enumerates return fields. With only 2 simple parameters and no nested objects, it fully covers what the agent needs. Distinguishes from siblings effectively.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description doesn't add significant meaning beyond schema; the parameter 'includeRenewalPricing' is mentioned in returns but not elaborated in parameter context.

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?

Clearly states it provides a one-shot management report for an ENS name, listing specific return fields. Distinguishes from get_name_details by noting the recommendation engine.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use (management report, health check queries) and when not to (if marketplace data needed, use get_name_details). Provides alternative and rationale.

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