domain-suite-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

check_availability

Determine if a domain name is available for registration. Supports any TLD with zero-config RDAP/WHOIS lookups and optional pricing from configured providers.

Instructions

Check domain availability. Zero-config via RDAP/WHOIS; adds pricing if provider configured.

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": {
      "domain": "<domain>"
    },
    "name": "check_availability"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`domain`	Yes	e.g. 'myapp' or 'myapp.com'
`tlds`	No	e.g. ['com','io','dev']; default .com
`provider`	No	provider for pricing (optional)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Mar 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It mentions the method (RDAP/WHOIS) and conditional pricing, but does not explicitly confirm read-only nature or discuss side effects, rate limits, or output format.

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 short sentences with no wasted words. The purpose is stated first, followed by relevant technical details.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The tool is simple and the description covers the basic behavior, but it lacks information about the return value structure (no output schema) and does not specify what constitutes an 'available' domain.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining the provider parameter controls pricing inclusion, which is not clear from the schema alone.

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 states exactly what the tool does: 'Check domain availability' with a verb and resource. It also adds details about zero-config via RDAP/WHOIS and conditional pricing, distinguishing it from sibling tools like register_domain or get_domain.

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?

The description implies usage context (e.g., before registration) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide guidance on when not to use it.

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