Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-namecheap

mcp-namecheap

by fantomdancer
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

namecheap_get_tld_pricing

Get detailed pricing for any TLD, including registration, renewal, and transfer costs across multiple year periods.

Instructions

Get pricing for a TLD (.com, .net, .app, etc.) — registration, renewal, and transfer costs for different year periods.

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": {
      "tld": "<tld>"
    },
    "name": "namecheap_get_tld_pricing"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tldYesTLD without dot (e.g. "com", "net", "app")

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It correctly implies a read-only operation through 'Get' and adds useful context about cost types (registration, renewal, transfer) and year periods. However, it does not address edge cases like unsupported TLDs or currency.

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, well-paced sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes concrete examples and details without 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 the simple one-parameter schema and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and return scope. Minor omissions like currency or error behavior prevent a perfect score.

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?

The input schema fully describes the 'tld' parameter (including example formats), so the description adds no extra meaning beyond that. Baseline 3 applies given 100% schema coverage.

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 function with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('pricing for a TLD'), and distinguishes it from sibling domain management tools by specifying registration, renewal, and transfer costs.

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 implicitly conveys when to use this tool (whenever TLD pricing is needed) and provides clear context without exclusions. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions.

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