tld.expert

Check a brand name

check_brand_name

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when the user is naming a product or company and asks whether the name is free beyond the domain: a GitHub account or org, an npm package, or a US trademark ("is acme taken on GitHub", "is there a trademark for acme"). Checks GitHub, the npm registry and live USPTO marks right now; each answer carries its source URL and checked time. "none" means the source has no record, never that the name is available or safe to use; a trademark search is not legal clearance. For the domain itself, call check_domain_availability.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "check_brand_name"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	A bare name like "acme" (a domain like "acme.io" is cut to "acme"). Max 63 characters after cleanup.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, it discloses that sources are queried live, that each answer carries a source URL and checked time, that 'none' means no record rather than availability, and that a trademark hit is not legal clearance. These are exactly the interpretive caveats an agent needs and none of them are derivable from the structured fields.

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?

Front-loaded with the trigger condition, then scope, then caveats, then the handoff to the sibling. It is a single dense block rather than broken into scannable sentences, but no sentence is filler.

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?

There is no output schema, yet the description covers the return shape (per-source result with source URL and checked time) and the semantics of a negative result. Combined with the annotation coverage, an agent has everything needed to call it and interpret the response.

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% and the schema itself already explains bare-name normalization ('acme.io' is cut to 'acme') and length limits. The description adds no further parameter guidance, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('check a brand name') and enumerates exactly what is checked: GitHub account/org, npm package, and live USPTO marks. It also explicitly contrasts with check_domain_availability for the domain case, so an agent can separate it from siblings without opening a schema.

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?

Opens with an explicit trigger ('use this when the user is naming a product or company and asks whether the name is free beyond the domain') and gives sample utterances. It also routes the domain case to check_domain_availability, so both when-to-use and the alternative are named.

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

All tld.expert tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?