Skip to main content
Glama

Cheapest Domains

by domains.cheapest
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Compare prices for an extension

get_tld_prices

Compare all covered registrars for one extension. Returns source failures, quote timestamps and minimum terms; availability is not checked.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tldYesOne covered ASCII top-level extension, such as com or .com. Multi-part suffixes and IDNs are not covered.
nameNoOne ASCII domain label without the extension, such as myproject. Price and link tools only build links from it; availability and popularity tools send the exact domain to their providers.
sortNoRanking metric. Total uses a conservative new-registration estimate.renewal
limitNoMaximum number of results, up to 200.
yearsNoPlanning horizon in years, including initial registration.
formatNoResponse representation. CSV and Markdown use the same filters, order and bounded pagination; they contain main offers, not favorite comparison arrays. MCP retains structured JSON alongside rendered text.json
offsetNoResult offset. Follow pagination.next for additional results; the feed can change between requests.
orderByNoOrder results by the selected price metric or extension. Cheapest-per-extension winners are selected before ordering.price
directionNoAscending or descending result order. Unknown totals follow priced totals in either price direction.asc
favoritesNoUp to two distinct connected registrar IDs, comma-separated. Adds saved favorite offers and fresh baselines for this result page, independent of filters. Does not save preferences or check names.
registrarNoConnected registrar ID from the registrars endpoint. Omit to compare all.
registrarsNoComma-separated connected registrar IDs to compare together. Use instead of registrar. Cheapest-per-extension winners are chosen within this set.
includeStaleNoAccepted for compatibility. Saved prices stay in results until a successful refresh replaces them and are labeled stale. includeStale=true still requires view=all.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, non-idempotent), the description discloses concrete output characteristics: source failures, quote timestamps and minimum terms, plus the availability gap. This tells the agent what data quality caveats to expect, which annotations alone cannot 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?

Two dense sentences with zero filler: the scope statement comes first and the return/caveat information second. Nothing is redundant with the title or schema.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description usefully names key return elements (source failures, quote timestamps, minimum terms) and the availability limitation. Pagination and formatting behavior are left entirely to the schema, but for a 13-param read tool this is largely sufficient.

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?

All 13 parameters have 100% schema description coverage, including enums, defaults, ranges and even cross-parameter notes (favorites, includeStale), so the schema carries the burden. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, which is the correct baseline when coverage is this high.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (compare) and scoped resource (all covered registrars for one extension), which implicitly separates it from the name-driven search_prices sibling. It does not explicitly name that sibling, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

'availability is not checked' is a useful boundary cue that implies check_availability should be used instead, but no alternative is named and no other when-to-use context (e.g. vs search_prices or estimate_cost) is given. Usage is only implied.

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

All Cheapest Domains toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources