add_favorite_tldSave one extension to the caller's favorites. The leading dot is optional. Fails if it is already saved, or if the account is at its cap.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tld | Yes | An extension, with or without the dot. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Given annotations already indicate this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent write operation, the description adds meaningful behavioral detail by disclosing the leading dot is optional and that the call fails on duplicate or cap. This goes beyond the annotation baseline without contradicting it.
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?
Two sentences with no fluff; the primary action is front-loaded and the edge cases are stated compactly. Every sentence earns its place.
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?
For a single-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description supplies the essential behavior, the accepted input format, and the main failure modes. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to invoke it 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 schema fully documents the sole parameter tld as 'An extension, with or without the dot,' and the description restates that the leading dot is optional. With 100% schema description coverage, the description does not add substantial new parameter semantics.
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 a specific action ('Save one extension to the caller's favorites') with a concrete resource. It is easily distinguishable from sibling tools like list_favorite_tlds and remove_favorite_tld because it explicitly targets adding a single extension to favorites.
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 implies when to use this tool—when a caller wants to save a TLD to their favorites—but it never explicitly contrasts it with alternatives or states when not to use it. The failure conditions ('Fails if it is already saved, or if the account is at its cap') give context but do not provide clear routing guidance relative to sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource or action: domain availability search, username checking, candidate generation, saved domains, favorite TLDs, and recent history are clearly separated. There is no meaningful overlap that would cause an agent to select the wrong tool.
Tool names follow a mostly consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern, but there are minor variations: favorites use add/remove/list, saved domains use save/remove/list, and history uses get_recent_* rather than list_*. These are predictable per resource but not perfectly uniform across the set.
Eleven tools is well-scoped for the domain of brand name availability. Each tool earns its place and maps to a clear step in the workflow: searching domains, checking usernames, generating candidates, saving names, managing favorite TLDs, and reviewing recent activity.
The tool surface covers the full lifecycle of the domain: searching availability, checking social handles, generating candidates, saving/removing/listings saved names, managing favorite extensions, and reading recent history. There are no obvious dead ends or missing operations that would block the primary workflows.