Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Unique Domains MCP server

Unique Domains MCP server

Official
by UniqueDomains
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Stored answer for one domain name

ud_get_name
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve stored status, drop day, price, registry and word facts, and comparable sales for one specific domain name to check availability, cost, or sale timing.

Instructions

The stored answer for one domain name: status, drop day, price today, registry facts, word facts and similar sales. Use it when someone asks about one specific domain name: whether it is open or for sale, what it costs, when it drops. Stored data as of its day, not a live reading. Pass name (such as get.plumbing).

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "ud_get_name"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesA full domain name on an ending the catalog holds, lowercased, IDN as punycode. A bare word, a subdomain, an e-mail address or an unknown ending answers 400 `validation_failed` with `reason` and `suggestion`.
fieldsNoComma-separated top-level keys to keep: id, name, ending, tracked, status, lifecycle, drop, ownableNow, price, registry, parking, length, format, shape, word, rating, verdict, value, comps.

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

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare this a read-only, idempotent, closed-world lookup, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: the data is a stored snapshot 'as of its day, not a live reading', which sets agent expectations about freshness. It does not discuss pagination or errors directly, though the schema covers the 400 case.

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?

The payload contents are front-loaded, followed by the usage condition and the freshness caveat, so the most important information arrives first. There is mild redundancy between 'price today' in the payload list and 'what it costs' in the usage sentence, and the trailing 'Pass `name`' sentence partly duplicates schema content.

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, the description need not detail return values, yet it still summarizes the payload categories. Freshness is disclosed, and the single required parameter is exemplified. It is nearly complete for a single-record lookup; only an explicit stance on alternatives versus ud_get_domain is missing.

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 `name` and `fields` are already documented in the input schema, including the punycode/lowercase rules and the 400 failure mode. The description only restates the `name` parameter with an example (get.plumbing), adding marginal value. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the semantics.

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?

It states a concrete verb and resource ('the stored answer for one domain name') and enumerates the payload (status, drop day, price, registry facts, word facts, comps), which tells an agent exactly what it returns. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from near-siblings like ud_get_domain or ud_get_name_comps, so the boundary must be inferred from the 'one specific domain name' scoping.

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 clear selection condition: use when someone asks about one specific domain name, with example questions (open or for sale, cost, drop date). It stops short of naming alternatives or saying when this is the wrong tool, which is the only thing separating it from a 5.

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