Skip to main content
Glama

NameSniper

by pro.namesniper
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

namesniper_check

All-in-one brand name check: domain availability across TLDs, username availability across the major social platforms, an optional 0-100 brand score, and USPTO trademark screening. Returns JSON with per-TLD and per-platform results (each with an availability verdict and 0-1 confidence), availability summaries, brandScore, and trademark risk. Use namesniper_check_domains or namesniper_check_social instead when only one dimension is needed. Free without an API key (rate-limited; trademark is skipped and Instagram/TikTok/X return best-effort HTTP confidence); a paid key unlocks verified accuracy on those platforms plus trademark screening.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesThe brand name to check
planNoIgnored - derived from your API key
userIdNoIgnored - derived from your API key
domainsNoTLDs to check (default: com,org,net,app,dev,tech,io,co,ai)
platformsNoSocial platforms to check (default: the standard platform grid; excludes Telegram, pass platforms explicitly including telegram to check it)
trademarkNoInclude trademark screening via USPTO — requires an API key and counts against the plan's monthly screening allowance; ignored for unauthenticated callers (default: true when authenticated)
brandScoreNoInclude brand score analysis (default: true)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / plan
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Ignored - derived from your API key",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / userId / description
      Previous value: -"Ignored — derived from your API key"New value: +"Ignored - derived from your API key"
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / trademark / description
      Previous value: -"Include trademark screening via USPTO — requires an API key; ignored for unauthenticated callers (default: true when authenticated)"New value: +"Include trademark screening via USPTO — requires an API key and counts against the plan's monthly screening allowance; ignored for unauthenticated callers (default: true when authenticated)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / userId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Ignored — derived from your API key",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / platforms / description
      Previous value: -"Social platforms to check (default: all supported platforms)"New value: +"Social platforms to check (default: the standard platform grid; excludes Telegram, pass platforms explicitly including telegram to check it)"
  4. First observed

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: return format (JSON structure with per-TLD/per-platform results, availability verdicts, confidence scores, summaries, brandScore, trademark risk), limitations (free: rate-limited, trademark skipped, Instagram/TikTok/X return best-effort HTTP confidence), and authentication effects (paid key unlocks verified accuracy).

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?

The description is a single, well-organized paragraph that front-loads the core purpose, then lists components, return format, usage alternatives, and cost/limitation details. Every sentence adds value; there is no redundancy or wasted words.

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?

Given 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is remarkably complete. It explains the full output structure, behavioral differences across authentication states, and when to use sibling tools. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Although schema description coverage is 100%, the description adds meaningful context beyond the schema: it explains that 'plan' and 'userId' are ignored and derived from the API key, provides default TLDs and platforms, and clarifies the behavior of 'trademark' and 'brandScore' based on authentication. This enriches the agent's understanding of parameter semantics.

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 performs an 'all-in-one brand name check' covering domains, social usernames, brand score, and trademark. It explicitly distinguishes from siblings by naming 'namesniper_check_domains' and 'namesniper_check_social' as alternatives for single-dimension checks.

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?

It provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives ('use namesniper_check_domains or namesniper_check_social instead when only one dimension is needed'). It also explains the behavior based on authentication (free vs. paid key), including rate limits and feature availability.

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

All NameSniper 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