Skip to main content
Glama

Domains

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Find Available Domains

find_available_domains
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search for AVAILABLE domain names to register from a keyword — the domain name search / brainstorming tool. Pass a keyword ("acme") and get back which domains are actually free to register: the exact name across .com/.io/.ai/.co/.app/.dev, plus creative variations (getacme.com, acmehq.com, tryacme.io, acmeapp.com, …). Use for "find me an available domain for X", "domain name ideas for my startup", "is there an open domain for X", "suggest domain names". Returns available domains ranked (exact match + .com first). Availability is a live registry (RDAP) signal, keyless. For a single specific domain use domain_status; to check one name across TLDs without variations use check_availability.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tldsNoTLDs to consider (without the dot), e.g. ["com","io","ai"]. Default: com, io, ai, co, app, dev. Max 10.
keywordYesBase keyword or brand name to build domain ideas from, e.g. "acme".
include_variationsNoAlso try prefix/suffix variations (get-, try-, -app, -hq, …). Default true. Set false for exact-keyword-only across TLDs.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "keyword": "acme"
+  },
+  {
+    "include_variations": true,
+    "keyword": "nexus",
+    "tlds": [
+      "com",
+      "io",
+      "app"
+    ]
+  }
+]
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, non-destructive). The description adds meaningful behavioral context: availability is a live registry (RDAP) signal, keyless, and results are ranked with exact match and .com first. This goes beyond what annotations alone communicate.

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?

The description is longer than strictly necessary but each sentence serves a purpose: purpose, examples, use cases, output behavior, and alternatives. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and well-organized, though slightly verbose.

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 explains enough about the return value (available domains ranked, exact match + .com first) and the live/keyless nature of the data. It also covers alternatives and typical use cases, making it nearly complete for this tool's complexity.

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?

The input schema already provides 100% coverage for all three parameters: keyword, tlds, and include_variations. The description reinforces these with examples but does not add new semantic detail beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool searches for available domain names from a keyword and gives concrete examples (getacme.com, acmehq.com). It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly naming domain_status and check_availability, making the purpose unmistakable.

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?

The description provides explicit use case phrases like "find me an available domain for X" and "domain name ideas for my startup". It also gives clear alternatives: "For a single specific domain use domain_status; to check one name across TLDs without variations use check_availability." This exceeds basic guidance.

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

All Domains toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources