Skip to main content
Glama

DomainKits

by io.github.ABTdomain

Deleted Domains Search

deleted
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search domains that have completed the deletion cycle and are open for immediate registration at standard cost, filtered by keyword, TLD, age range, length, and character set.

Related: available, bulk_available, whois.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tldNoFilter by TLD (e.g., 'com', 'net', 'org')
holdNoRegistry hold status — no_hold = immediately registrable
pageNoPage number for pagination
sortNoSort order
typeNoCharacter set filter
lengthNoDomain name length filter
excludeNoNegative keywords to exclude
keywordYesSearch term (min 2 chars). IMPORTANT: 2-character keywords match the START of the name only; 'contain' and 'end' are unavailable at this length and total_found will exclude mid-name matches. Use 3+ characters for true substring matching.
positionNoKeyword placement in domain name. Default is 'all' (substring match). Ignored when keyword is 2 characters (always start).
age_rangeNoHistorical age before deletion
no_hyphenNoExclude hyphenated domains
no_numberNoExclude domains containing numbers
tld_count_maxNoMaximum cross-TLD registration count for the name. Integer 0-10000. See tld_count_min.
tld_count_minNoMinimum cross-TLD registration count for the name. Integer 0-10000. Combine with tld_count_max for a range; set both equal for an exact count. Matches the prefix_tld_count field in results.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNo
pageNo
errorNoError message when success is false
totalNoNumber of results on this page
successYes
max_pageNo
total_foundNoTotal matching results across all pages

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful deleted-domain lifecycle and pricing context, but it leaves the hold-status nuance unmentioned: the schema allows has_hold domains, which could make the phrase 'open for immediate registration' misleading if interpreted as applying to all results.

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 sentences with no filler: the first front-loads the tool's purpose and search scope, and the second names related tools. Each sentence earns its place.

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?

For a 14-parameter read-only search, the description plus complete schema descriptions and output schema provide enough to invoke the tool correctly. The main gap is that the description does not reconcile 'open for immediate registration' with the hold filter, but the schema covers the operational detail.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description only summarizes a few filters (keyword, TLD, age range, length, character set) and adds no syntax, defaults, or caveats beyond what the input schema already documents in detail.

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 names a specific verb and resource: searching domains that have completed the deletion cycle and are open for immediate registration at standard cost. It goes beyond the title by defining the lifecycle state and listing filter dimensions, which distinguishes it from siblings like available, whois, and bulk_available.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description clearly implies when to use this tool: when the agent needs deleted domains at the end of the deletion cycle rather than active or currently available domains. It names related tools, but it does not explicitly state when to choose one over the other, so it stops short of full 5-level guidance.

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

All DomainKits 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

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Many domain-search tools (active, aged, expired, deleted, market, nrds, nrds_live) have overlapping boundaries that depend on subtle lifecycle or listing distinctions, and pairs like bulk_tld/tld_check and nrds/nrds_live are easy to confuse. The detailed descriptions and related-tool hints help, but an agent still faces several nearly interchangeable choices.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tool names follow a consistent lowercase_snake_case convention, with no mixing of camelCase or inconsistent verb styles. However, the names use a noun/adjective pattern rather than a clear verb_noun action pattern, and acronyms like nrds, epp_status, and tld_rank make some names less predictable.

Tool Count2/5

32 tools is heavy for a domain toolkit, and several tools are close variants of the same search or check operation, such as active/aged/expired/deleted/market and nrds/nrds_live. The broad domain scope justifies some breadth, but the set would be much more focused with consolidation.

Completeness4/5

The toolset covers the core domain lifecycle well: availability, registration states, WHOIS, DNS, pricing, TLD statistics, safety, backlinks, typosquatting, and monitoring. The main gaps are that strategy can store data but has no retrieval or deletion action, and market pricing is limited to Sedo only.

Resources