Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
namecheap-webui-mcp

namecheap-webui-mcp

by Microck
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

namecheap_domain_get_features

Retrieve auto-renew, domain-lock, and whois-privacy settings for a Namecheap domain using the web dashboard.

Instructions

Read feature toggles on Domain Manage (auto-renew, domain-lock, whois-privacy).

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": {
      "domainName": "<domainName>"
    },
    "name": "namecheap_domain_get_features"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainNameYesFull domain name, for example example.com
headedNoRun with a visible browser window.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only states 'Read feature toggles', which implies a non-destructive read operation, but provides no details about potential side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens if the domain doesn't exist. Minimal behavioral disclosure.

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?

Single sentence, 11 words, front-loaded with action verb. Every word earns its place. No redundancy or fluff.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Without an output schema, the description could explain return values or expected response format. It lists some feature toggles but doesn't describe the output structure, error scenarios, or prerequisites. Adequate for a simple read tool but leaves gaps.

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% with descriptions for both parameters. The tool description does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides; it merely lists examples of feature toggles. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states verb 'Read' and resource 'feature toggles on Domain Manage' with specific examples (auto-renew, domain-lock, whois-privacy). Distinguishes it from sibling set_feature and other get tools, though could be more explicit about the exact scope.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

No explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives. The description implies it's for reading feature settings, but doesn't contrast with namecheap_domain_set_feature or other related tools. Usage context is inferred from the tool name and sibling set.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools