Skip to main content
Glama

Atom.com — Premium Domains

by com.atom

register_domain

Destructive

Register a FRESH domain — an available domain that is NOT an existing Atom marketplace listing — directly at the registrar. This SPENDS REAL MONEY and requires the 'domains:register' scope. Use this ONLY when check_domain_availability reported status 'available' for this exact domain. If the domain is instead an Atom marketplace listing (status 'premium'/'taken'), use purchase_domain instead — never this tool; it will reject a marketplace domain with error 'is_marketplace_listing'.

MANDATORY two-step flow — never skip the quote:

  1. Call with confirm=false (default) to get a QUOTE: returns the authoritative price, its breakdown (unit_price, icann_total, vat_amount), term_years (server-derived from the TLD — never assume or pass one), the user's current balance, sufficient_funds, whether a saved card exists (has_saved_card / saved_card), and expires_at.

  2. SHOW THE USER: the exact price breakdown, and state plainly which payment method you are about to use and how much it will charge — e.g. "$19.98 (domain $17.99 + ICANN fee $1.99) from your Atom balance" or "...from your saved Visa ending 4242". Get explicit confirmation before proceeding.

  3. Call again with confirm=true, the SAME idempotency_key, and payment_method set to exactly 'balance' or 'saved_card' (REQUIRED at this step — never omit it or guess): commits the charge and the registration. Returns status='registered', amount_charged, payment_method, and registrar_domain_id — the domain now shows up in the user's Atom account (dashboard → My Domains).

Rules: never assume or pass a price. Reuse one client-generated idempotency_key across both calls (and any retry) to prevent double-charging. If it reports error 'registrant_contact_required' (a registry needs this to complete registration), call create_registrant_contact with the user's name, phone, address, city, zip, and country, then retry with confirm=true. If payment_method='balance' and funds are insufficient, error 'insufficient_funds' reports required/available/top_up_url and whether a saved card exists as an alternative — tell the user both options plainly, do not silently retry with the other method. If payment_method='saved_card' and the charge fails, error 'card_payment_failed' reports why (including if it needs 3D Secure authentication, which cannot be completed here — offer balance or a different card instead).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesThe fresh domain to register, including extension.
confirmNofalse returns a quote; true commits the charge and registration (payment_method required).
payment_methodNoWhich rail to charge. REQUIRED when confirm=true — state this to the user before calling, never picked automatically. Ignored (and unnecessary) at the quote stage.
idempotency_keyYesClient-generated unique key; identical across the quote and confirm calls for the same intended registration. Prevents double-charging on retry.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYes
priceNoAuthoritative total price in USD (quote stage).
stageYes'quote' = price for confirmation; 'committed' = registration completed.
domainYes
statusNoRegistration status (committed stage).
balanceNoUser's current Atom balance (quote stage).
successYes
currencyNo
breakdownNoPrice components (quote stage): unit_price, icann_total, vat_amount.
next_stepNoHow to complete the registration (quote stage).
expires_atNoQuote expiry (quote stage).
saved_cardNo{brand, last4} of the saved card, if any (quote stage).
term_yearsNoServer-derived from the TLD.
amount_chargedNoAmount actually charged in USD (committed stage).
has_saved_cardNoWhether the user has a saved/default card on file (quote stage).
payment_methodNoWhich rail was actually charged (committed stage).
idempotency_keyNo
sufficient_fundsNoWhether balance covers the price (quote stage).
registrar_domain_idNoRegistrar domain id (committed stage).

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint, openWorldHint), the description discloses that the tool 'SPENDS REAL MONEY', requires the 'domains:register' scope, follows a mandatory quote-then-confirm flow, reuses an idempotency key to prevent double-charging, and surfaces specific error behaviors (insufficient_funds, card_payment_failed, is_marketplace_listing). This is far beyond what annotations alone convey.

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 long but every sentence carries essential operational guidance for a high-stakes, two-step payment tool. It is structured with a numbered three-step flow, explicit rules, and error-handling notes, all front-loaded after a purpose statement. No filler or repetition; the density is justified by the tool's complexity.

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?

The description covers prerequisites, the exact invocation sequence, required user consent messaging, payment method selection, idempotency, error recovery paths, and post-condition (domain appears in My Domains). With an output schema present, no return-format explanation is needed. Given the tool's complexity and the rich sibling set, this is fully complete.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds substantial meaning: confirm=false produces a quote, confirm=true commits the charge, payment_method is required only at confirmation and must be exactly 'balance' or 'saved_card', and the idempotency_key must be identical across both calls. It also clarifies that term_years is server-derived and should never be passed, enriching parameter understanding 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Register a FRESH domain' directly at the registrar, and explicitly distinguishes a fresh, available domain from an Atom marketplace listing. It also names the sibling purchase_domain as the alternative for marketplace domains, making the tool's unique scope unmistakable.

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?

The description gives an explicit condition: use this ONLY when check_domain_availability reported status 'available' for the exact domain. It also specifies when NOT to use it (status 'premium'/'taken' → use purchase_domain) and how to recover from the 'registrant_contact_required' error by calling create_registrant_contact. Alternatives and exclusions are fully spelled out.

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

All Atom.com — Premium Domains 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

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools serve the same resource+action through different payment channels (e.g., register_domain, register_domain_spt, get_domain_register_pay_link; purchase_domain, get_domain_purchase_pay_link, get_checkout_link; buy_ai_tokens, get_ai_tokens_pay_link). brainstorm_names is explicitly a duplicate of search_brandable_domains, so the set has multiple confusing overlaps despite detailed descriptions.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tool names follow a predictable snake_case verb_noun pattern (appraise_domain, check_domain_availability, purchase_domain, screen_trademark_conflicts). Minor deviations like brainstorm_names, register_domain_spt, and get_checkout_link break the pattern slightly but remain readable and recognizable.

Tool Count3/5

Sixteen tools is right at the boundary where a tool set starts to feel heavy. Many tools are legitimately needed for discovery, purchasing, and payment routing, but the duplicate name-generation tool and the multiple payment-route variants add unnecessary bulk.

Completeness4/5

The core domain lifecycle is well covered: search/discovery, availability checks, details, appraisal, trademark screening, registrant contact, and both fresh registration and marketplace purchase paths are present. Minor gaps exist around post-purchase management, account balance visibility, and offer submission, but the main user journey has no significant dead ends.

Resources