Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Unique Domains MCP server

Unique Domains MCP server

Official
by UniqueDomains
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Endings whose cheapest first year renews at a trap price

ud_list_price_traps
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists domain endings whose cheapest first-year price renews at a costly trap price, helping users avoid cheap initial offers with expensive renewals.

Instructions

Endings whose cheapest first year renews at a trap price, alphabetical. Use it when someone wants to avoid endings that are cheap the first year and costly to renew. Every input is optional.

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_list_price_traps"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fieldsNoComma-separated top-level keys to keep: tld, multiple, cheapestYearOne, cheapestRenewalElsewhere.

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

A3.5/5.0
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 profile is fully covered. The description adds only the alphabetical ordering fact and 'Every input is optional' — useful but thin; it never explains what qualifies as a 'trap price,' which is the tool's core selection criterion.

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, front-loaded with the scope of the result set before the usage hint. Slight redundancy in restating 'cheap the first year and costly to renew' after already saying 'trap price,' but nothing is wasted.

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 needn't explain return values, and rich annotations cover the safety profile for a single optional filter parameter. The one real gap is the undefined 'trap price' threshold, which leaves the inclusion criterion opaque to an agent reasoning about results.

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?

Only one optional parameter exists and the schema documents it at 100% coverage, including the exact enumerable keys (tld, multiple, cheapestYearOne, cheapestRenewalElsewhere). Per the high-coverage rule the schema carries this dimension, and the description's 'Every input is optional' adds little beyond it.

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 pairs a specific resource ('Endings') with a precise filter condition ('whose cheapest first year renews at a trap price') plus an ordering guarantee ('alphabetical'), so an agent knows exactly what set it returns. It does not, however, distinguish this from adjacent pricing siblings such as ud_list_price_changes or ud_list_tld_prices.

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 gives one positive trigger ('Use it when someone wants to avoid endings that are cheap the first year and costly to renew'), which is genuine when-to-use guidance. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or named alternatives for the closely-related pricing list tools, so the agent still has to infer when another tool is a better fit.

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