Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Unique Domains MCP server

Unique Domains MCP server

Official
by UniqueDomains
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Every list of values the answers use

ud_get_meta_enums
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve allowed values and meanings for statuses, venues, bands, and other coded fields so answers can interpret returned codes correctly.

Instructions

Every list of values the answers use, such as statuses, venues and bands. Use it when an answer holds a code and someone needs its meaning. Takes no input.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "ud_get_meta_enums"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fieldsNoComma-separated top-level keys to keep: statuses, lifecycles, eppStatuses, lookupStates, wordShapes, wordOrigins, tldKinds, agendaCategories, eventCategories, editionLanes, changeEventTypes, changeEventSubjects, auctionVenues, parkingServices.

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

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the description need not repeat safety traits. What it does add is inaccurate: 'Takes no input' is false, since the schema exposes an optional `fields` filter, and the description never mentions that the returned set can be narrowed. A false behavioral claim is worse than silence here.

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?

Two short sentences with the purpose front-loaded and no filler. The third clause, 'Takes no input', is both unnecessary and wrong, which is the only structural blemish.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description correctly frames this as a reference lookup. However, for a tool whose one parameter controls which value sets come back, omitting the filterable-dimension concept leaves an agent unable to scope a large response, and the 'no input' claim worsens that gap.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, which would normally set a baseline of 3, but the description actively contradicts the schema by asserting the tool takes no input. The optional comma-separated `fields` parameter is documented only in the schema, and the description's 'every list' framing implies an always-full response, misleading an agent about the ability to reduce output.

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 a concrete resource: the reference lists of coded values (statuses, venues, bands) that other answers return. Combined with the title and sibling set of ud_get_meta_* tools, an agent can tell this is the enum/reference-lookup tool rather than a data-fetching tool. It stops short of a crisp verb+resource phrase like 'List reference value sets', but the examples make the purpose unambiguous.

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 an explicit trigger condition: use it when an answer contains a code and its meaning is needed. That is a real when-to-use rule an agent can act on. It does not name alternatives or exclusions (e.g., that ud_get_meta_providers or ud_get_meta_freshness cover different metadata), so differentiation from siblings is left implicit.

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