Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Unique Domains MCP server

Unique Domains MCP server

Official
by UniqueDomains
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

One dated daily edition of Business Ideas or Trending Domains

ud_get_edition
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a past daily edition of Business Ideas or Trending Domains by persona and date, so users can review a specific day's founder or investor content.

Instructions

One dated daily edition of Business Ideas or Trending Domains: founders read the first, investors the second. Use it when someone asks about a past day's edition. Pass persona (such as founder) and date (such as 2026-11-10).

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": {
      "persona": "<persona>",
      "date": "<date>"
    },
    "name": "ud_get_edition"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateYesThe edition day, UTC.
fieldsNoComma-separated top-level keys to keep: persona, date, publishAt, trendCount, nameCount, openCount, previousDate, nextDate, trends.
personaYesBusiness Ideas (`founder`) or Trending Domains (`investor`).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNo
metaNoThe day of the answer, and the page cursor of a list.
linksNoLinks of the answer.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.4

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety and idempotency profile is fully covered structurally. The description adds only that editions are one-per-day and persona-differentiated, and says nothing about what happens for a date with no edition (empty result vs. error) or about freshness/latency. Useful framing, but modest value beyond the annotations.

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?

Three short clauses: what it returns, when to use it, and what to pass — front-loaded with no filler. The parenthetical examples are cheap and directly actionable.

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 an output schema present, return values need no explanation, and parameters are fully documented, so the description is largely complete for a simple lookup. The one meaningful omission is behavior for dates with no published edition, which an agent would want before calling with arbitrary historical dates.

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%, so both required parameters are already documented in the schema, including the persona enum mapping and the UTC date semantics. The description merely restates the persona and date examples and never mentions the optional `fields` projection parameter, so it adds little beyond structured data.

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?

The description names the exact resource ("one dated daily edition") and its two content variants, mapping persona to product line ("founders read the first, investors the second"). It is instantly distinguishable from a generic list tool, but it never names the obvious sibling ud_get_latest_edition, so the differentiation from that tool rests on the implicit wording "a past day's edition."

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives a concrete trigger, "Use it when someone asks about a past day's edition," which effectively signals the boundary against the latest-edition tool without naming it. No explicit when-not or named alternative is provided, so it falls short of the top score.

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