Skip to main content
Glama
einiba

mcp-server-canyougrab

by einiba
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python
Remote

Server Quality Checklist

75%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v1.1.2

  • Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: check_domains for availability, check_usage for user quota, and get_domain_info for WHOIS details. No overlap in functionality.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with underscores (check_domains, check_usage, get_domain_info), making them predictable and easy to understand.

    Tool Count5/5

    With only 3 tools, the server is well-scoped for its purpose of checking domain availability and info. No tool feels redundant or missing for basic usage.

    Completeness4/5

    The tools cover core functionality: availability checking, usage tracking, and domain info. However, lacking a registration tool is a minor gap given the server's name implies grabbing domains.

  • Average 4.3/5 across 3 of 3 tools scored.

    See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 0 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • Last stable release on
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI is passing

  • This repository is licensed under MIT License.

  • This repository includes a README.md file.

  • No tool usage detected in the last 30 days. Usage tracking helps demonstrate server value.

    Tip: use the "Try in Browser" feature on the server page to seed initial usage.

  • This repository includes a glama.json configuration file.

  • If you are the author, simply .

    If the server belongs to an organization, first add glama.json to the root of your repository:

    {
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/server.json",
  "maintainers": [
    "your-github-username"
  ]
}

    Then . Browse examples.

  • Add related servers to improve discoverability.

How to sync the server with GitHub?

Servers are automatically synced at least once per day, but you can also sync manually at any time to instantly update the server profile.

To manually sync the server, click the "Sync Server" button in the MCP server admin interface.

How is the quality score calculated?

The overall quality score combines two components: Tool Definition Quality (70%) and Server Coherence (30%).

Tool Definition Quality measures how well each tool describes itself to AI agents. Every tool is scored 1–5 across six dimensions: Purpose Clarity (25%), Usage Guidelines (20%), Behavioral Transparency (20%), Parameter Semantics (15%), Conciseness & Structure (10%), and Contextual Completeness (10%). The server-level definition quality score is calculated as 60% mean TDQS + 40% minimum TDQS, so a single poorly described tool pulls the score down.

Server Coherence evaluates how well the tools work together as a set, scoring four dimensions equally: Disambiguation (can agents tell tools apart?), Naming Consistency, Tool Count Appropriateness, and Completeness (are there gaps in the tool surface?).

Tiers are derived from the overall score: A (≥3.5), B (≥3.0), C (≥2.0), D (≥1.0), F (<1.0). B and above is considered passing.

Tool Scores

  • Behavior4/5

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

    Annotations already declare read-only, non-destructive, idempotent. Description adds specific return details (owner, expiry, nameservers). No contradictions.

    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?

    Single, well-structured sentence front-loading the usage intent. No unnecessary words.

    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?

    Covers purpose, return data, and context. Missing details like output format or caching, but acceptable for a simple lookup tool.

    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 has 0% description coverage for the 'domain' parameter. Description only says 'specific domain' without format, examples, or constraints. Insufficient compensation.

    Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

    Purpose5/5

    Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

    Clearly states that the tool fetches WHOIS/registration information for a domain, listing specific data points (owner, registration, expiry, nameservers). Distinguishes from siblings by focusing on domain info.

    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?

    Explicitly says when to use (user wants WHOIS/registration info). Does not exclude alternatives but context from sibling names implies differentiation.

    Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

  • Behavior4/5

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

    Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, openWorld. Description adds value by detailing return fields (confidence, source, cache age) and handling of ambiguous results, which is beyond what annotations provide. No contradiction with 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?

    Two concise sentences front-load the purpose and usage, then add behavioral details. Every sentence is necessary and no redundancy.

    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?

    Given one required parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, return content, and edge cases (ambiguous lookups). However, it lacks details on domain format validation or limits, and the 0% schema coverage means the description could have provided more parameter guidance.

    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 0%, so description should compensate; it mentions 'one or more domains' but does not specify format (e.g., full domain names) or constraints. The parameter is simple (array of strings), so the minimal gain is acceptable, but no added detail.

    Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

    Purpose5/5

    Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

    The description clearly states the tool checks domain availability, specifies the user intent ('when the user wants to know'), and distinguishes from siblings (check_usage, get_domain_info) by focusing on availability and return details like confidence and cache age.

    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?

    Explicitly says when to use ('when the user wants to know whether one or more domains are available to register'), but does not mention when not to use or provide explicit alternatives. However, sibling names imply differentiation.

    Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

  • Behavior4/5

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

    Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds valuable context about the time scope ('current billing period') and the specific data returned (plan, usage, quota), going 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?

    The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys all necessary information without any fluff. Every word earns its place.

    Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

    Completeness5/5

    Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

    For a tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is fully complete. It tells the agent exactly what the tool does and when to use it, leaving no ambiguity.

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

    Parameters4/5

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

    There are no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter semantics. Baseline of 4 is appropriate as it adds no extra but is not deficient.

    Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

    Purpose5/5

    Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

    The description clearly states the tool's purpose: to see plan, usage, and remaining quota. The verb 'check' is specific, and the resource is explicitly the CanYouGrab.it account. It naturally distinguishes from sibling tools (check_domains, get_domain_info) which are domain-focused.

    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?

    The description explicitly states when to use the tool ('when the user wants to see...'), providing clear context. It does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives, but given the sibling tools are for different domains, exclusion is not necessary.

    Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

GitHub Badge

Glama performs regular codebase and documentation scans to:

  • Confirm that the MCP server is working as expected.
  • Confirm that there are no obvious security issues.
  • Evaluate tool definition quality.

Our badge communicates server capabilities, safety, and installation instructions.

Card Badge

canyougrab-api MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

canyougrab-api MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/einiba/canyougrab-api'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server