Scopeweb

suggest_names

Read-only

★ START HERE when the user is choosing or inventing a name: it returns candidate names across a namespace. 'suggest names', 'help me name X', 'what should we call it', 'find me a domain for Y'. Give it a CONCEPT (a word or short phrase) and it generates and ranks candidates around it, classified by what is actually free. Read-only. Cannot spend money. (Renamed from browse_namespace on 2026-09-09: the old name described the mechanism, so assistants looking for a way to SUGGEST NAMES never matched it and invented candidates from their own heads instead.) Use scan_namespace instead when you already have an explicit list. Follow this with score_name to rank, and check_live LAST as the purchase gate. Re-querying the same scan_id walks deeper into the namespace and converges over about 3 calls. Unregistered does not mean purchasable: reserved and premium names answer the registry the same way. Only a registrar quote settles a price. PRICES ARE IDENTICAL FOR ALL BUYERS REGARDLESS OF BUDGET. A budget changes which candidates are recommended and how they are ordered; it never changes what anything costs.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tlds`	No	Defaults to com/io/ai/app/dev/co.
`limit`	No	Candidates per page, max 50 (default 25)
`query`	No	A word, name or idea, e.g. 'stowed'
`offset`	No	Walk deeper into the expansion
`scan_id`	No	Resume a previous browse; replaces query/tlds

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`query`	Yes
`results`	Yes	Candidate names with availability where known.
`scan_id`	Yes	Re-query this to walk deeper into the namespace.
`unprobed`	No	Candidates whose availability was NOT checked. Never read as free.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 5, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "query": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "results": {
+      "description": "Candidate names with availability where known.",
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "scan_id": {
+      "description": "Re-query this to walk deeper into the namespace.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "unprobed": {
+      "description": "Candidates whose availability was NOT checked. Never read as free.",
+      "type": "integer"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "results",
+    "query",
+    "scan_id"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, openWorld, non-idempotent, non-destructive) the description discloses the money constraint ('cannot spend money'), the scan_id deep-walk convergence over ~3 calls, the unregistered-vs-purchasable distinction, and the critical pricing invariants ('prices are identical for all buyers', budget affects ordering not cost). These are non-obvious behavioral traits an agent would otherwise get wrong.

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 '★ START HERE' directive and workflow, then caveats. The rename-history sentence is long but earns its place by explaining the discoverability fix. Dense overall, with minor redundancy across the pricing/budget sentences.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description still covers everything else an agent needs: the entry-point role, the follow-on tool chain, pagination via scan_id, and the purchase/pricing caveats that gate downstream actions.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

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 adds meaning beyond the schema by characterizing 'query' as a CONCEPT (word or short phrase) and explaining that re-querying the same scan_id walks deeper and converges, which the schema only weakly signals with 'Resume a previous browse'.

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 ('returns candidate names across a namespace') and immediately positions itself as the entry point for naming tasks. It explicitly differentiates from sibling scan_namespace ('Use scan_namespace instead when you already have an explicit list'), so an agent can route without opening either 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?

Gives explicit when-to-use triggers ('choosing or inventing a name', with sample user utterances), names the alternative (scan_namespace) and its selecting condition, and lays out a workflow chain (follow with score_name, check_live LAST as the purchase gate). Nothing is left to inference.

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

All Scopeweb tools Inspect

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

Need Help?