name-check
Server Details
Live brand-name availability checks: US trademark (USPTO), domains, social handles, app stores.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.6/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.
Only one tool exists, so there is no ambiguity between tools.
The single tool follows the verb_noun pattern with check_name, which is consistent.
One tool attempts to cover trademark, domain, social, and developer namespace checks, which is too few for the broad scope.
The tool covers a wide range of availability checks, leaving only minor potential gaps like additional TLDs or platforms.
Available Tools
1 toolcheck_nameCheck name availabilityARead-onlyInspect
Check whether a brand, business, product, or app name is available. Runs a real-time availability check across: the US trademark registry (USPTO — live registry data, not guesses), domain names (.com, .io, .co, .app, .dev, with registration prices), social handles (X/Twitter, Instagram, TikTok, LinkedIn), developer namespaces (npm, PyPI, crates.io, GitHub, Docker Hub), and the iOS App Store. Returns a structured verdict (clear / caution / conflict), an overall viability band, and a link to the full interactive result. Use this whenever a user is brainstorming, choosing, or validating a name for a startup, company, product, app, or project and wants to know if it is taken, trademarked, or safe to use. Call once per candidate name. Free, no API key (shared daily fair-use pool). Data by nombrio.com.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | The candidate name to check, e.g. 'Lumeo'. Plain name only — no URL, no TLD, no @handle. One name per call. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, which align with the tool's behavior. The description adds significant transparency beyond annotations: real-time check, free usage, no API key required, shared daily fair-use pool, and data source (nombrio.com). No contradictions.
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?
The description is comprehensive but not excessively long. It is front-loaded with the main purpose, then lists all checks, usage guidance, and limitations. Every sentence adds value; however, it could be slightly more concise by reducing some redundancy in listing checks, so score 4.
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?
Given the tool has only one parameter, full schema coverage, no output schema, and explicit annotations, the description covers all necessary context. It explains the return type (structured verdict, viability band, link) and when to call. No gaps remain for an agent to use the tool 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?
The input schema has 100% coverage with a detailed description for the 'name' parameter. The tool description adds context about what the name is used for (brand, business, product, app) but does not add new semantic meaning to the parameter itself beyond what the schema already provides. 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 the tool checks name availability across multiple registries. It uses specific verbs ('Check') and resource ('name availability'), and distinguishes from any potential siblings by listing the exact domains checked. With no sibling tools, differentiation is not required.
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 explicitly states when to use this tool: 'Use this whenever a user is brainstorming, choosing, or validating a name... Call once per candidate name.' It also specifies what not to input ('plain name only — no URL, no TLD, no @handle'). As there are no alternative tools, the guidance is complete.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!