Skip to main content
Glama
oborseth

Official Porkbun MCP Server

by oborseth
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Check Domains

check_domains
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check up to 25 domain names for availability and price in one call, returning separate lists of checked, invalid, and unresolved domains.

Instructions

Check up to 25 domains for availability and price in ONE call. Prefer this over calling check_domain in a loop whenever you have more than one name: Porkbun chunks availability checks per registry, so a batch is materially less work than the same names individually, and it draws on a separate budget of 200 domains per 60 seconds (counted per domain, not per call) rather than the single check's 10 per 10 seconds.

Read all three result lists — they mean different things. domains is keyed by domain name and each value has the same shape as check_domain's response. invalid holds entries that are not checkable at all (not a domain, unsupported TLD); one bad entry does NOT fail the call, so the other names still come back answered. unresolved holds domains the registry did not answer for — these are neither available nor taken, and reporting them as unavailable would be wrong. Retry those.

Duplicates are removed before the budget is charged. More than 25 names returns BULK_CHECK_TOO_MANY and checks nothing, rather than silently truncating, so split longer lists yourself. Synchronous, no polling — 25 mixed TLDs answers in roughly three seconds. One exception to watch: a few registries accept only a few domains per command and .de accepts exactly one, so a batch heavy in those TLDs returns BULK_CHECK_TOO_SLOW without checking anything. Group .de names into their own small calls.

RATE_LIMIT_EXCEEDED with reason: SUSTAINED_BULK_CHECKING means the account has been checking at scanning volume (hundreds of names an hour, few registrations) and is held to 50 names per 5 minutes for a day. Do not retry in a loop: check only names the user might actually buy, wait retryAfter, or tell the user support can raise the limit for a legitimate high-volume use.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainsYesFully qualified domain names to check, e.g. [`example.com`, `example.net`]. Max 25; duplicates are ignored.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.39.4

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only cover the safety profile (readOnly/idempotent/openWorld). The description adds the budget model (200 domains/60s counted per domain vs the single check's 10/10s), failure modes (BULK_CHECK_TOO_MANY, BULK_CHECK_TOO_SLOW, RATE_LIMIT_EXCEEDED with reason SUSTAINED_BULK_CHECKING), timing (~3s, no polling), and the critical semantic that `unresolved` is neither available nor taken.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then bolded sections for result lists, limits, and error handling. Despite its length, every paragraph carries distinct operational information (budgets, error codes, TLD handling) with no filler.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates fully by enumerating the three result lists and their distinct meanings, including the subtle 'unresolved is neither available nor taken, retry those' trap. Nothing needed for correct invocation or interpretation is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so 3 is the baseline; the description goes beyond by explaining the consequence of exceeding maxItems (error, checks nothing, no silent truncation) and that duplicates are stripped before the budget is charged. That adds meaning over the schema's terse 'Max 25; duplicates are ignored.'

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?

States a specific verb, resource, and scope: 'Check up to 25 domains for availability and price in ONE call.' It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling `check_domain` and frames the batch-vs-single tradeoff, so an agent can route without opening either schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives explicit when-to-use ('more than one name'), when-not ('not in a loop' for sustained scanning volume), and prerequisite grouping rules (isolate .de names, split lists over 25). The registry-chunking rationale makes the guidance actionable rather than arbitrary.

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