domain-radar
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| scan_keyword_tldsA | Audits a core keyword across major TLDs (.com, .net, .org, .ai, .io, .co, .ca, .de) to report registration status and commercial density. |
| find_available_combinationsB | Generates industry-specific combinations (prefix/suffix) with a target keyword and checks Verisign RDAP to return 100% AVAILABLE domains. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one audits a keyword across a fixed set of TLDs, while the other generates and checks new keyword combinations. There is no meaningful overlap that could confuse an agent.
Both tool names follow the same verb_noun pattern: scan_keyword_tlds and find_available_combinations. The pattern is predictable and consistent.
With only 2 tools, the server feels somewhat thin for a domain-radar service, but the two tools cover a coherent narrow workflow: auditing a keyword and discovering available variations. The count is borderline but not unreasonable.
The set covers basic keyword auditing and combination discovery, but lacks broader domain intelligence features like bulk lookups, registration monitoring, or detailed WHOIS data. It is adequate for a simple keyword-to-availability workflow but has notable gaps for a 'radar' concept.