Skip to main content
Glama
Thingscorp

thatmgmt-mcp

by Thingscorp
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

domains_check_availability

Check if a domain name is available to register by passing a fully qualified domain such as example.com; read-only and no API key needed.

Instructions

Check whether a domain name is available to register. Read-only, no API key needed: this uses the public endpoint, so any agent can try it with zero signup. Pass the fully qualified domain name, e.g. "example.com".

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesFully qualified domain name, e.g. example.com

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.2.1
    • removedInput schema / properties / optimizeFor
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "SPEED or ACCURACY",
-  "enum": [
-    "SPEED",
-    "ACCURACY"
-  ],
-  "type": "string"
-}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose meaningful traits: read-only operation, no API key requirement, and use of a public endpoint. It omits rate limits, behavior on malformed input, and whether results are cached, so it is solid but not exhaustive.

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 core action and three tight sentences. The final sentence largely duplicates the schema's own example, which is mild redundancy rather than a structural flaw.

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 single-parameter, annotation-free tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential invocation facts. The one remaining gap is the shape of the result (availability boolean vs. richer status), which an agent must infer.

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% and the description only restates the schema's example ('example.com') without adding format, TLD, or normalization details. Baseline 3 applies when the schema already documents the single parameter.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('check whether a domain name is available to register'), which implicitly separates it from pricing/registration siblings like domains_get_quote and domains_prepare_registration. It does not explicitly name a sibling it is not, so it falls short of the 5 bar.

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?

It tells the agent it can call this with zero signup, which sets the context, but gives no explicit when/when-not guidance or routing to alternatives (e.g., price lookup after availability, or domains_suggest for generating candidates). Usage is only implied.

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