Skip to main content
Glama
tudadada

mcp-server-domain-evaluator

README.md
# mcp-server-domain-evaluator

[![npm version](https://img.shields.io/npm/v/mcp-server-domain-evaluator.svg)](https://www.npmjs.com/package/mcp-server-domain-evaluator)
[![License: MIT](https://img.shields.io/badge/License-MIT-yellow.svg)](https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT)
[![MCP](https://img.shields.io/badge/MCP-Protocol-blue)](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)

Model Context Protocol (MCP) server for multi-dimensional domain quality grading, radio test scoring, and trademark risk detection.

---

## ⚡ Features & Tools

- **`evaluate_brand_quality`**: Grades domain name on pronounceability, memorability, radio test, syllable balance, and visual symmetry.
- **`screen_category_vs_trademark`**: Runs heuristic checks to distinguish generic category terms from high-risk corporate trademark violations.

---

## 🚀 Quick Start (Running with AI Clients)

### Claude Desktop Integration

Add this snippet to your `claude_desktop_config.json`:

```json
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "domain-evaluator": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "mcp-server-domain-evaluator"]
    }
  }
}
```

### Cursor IDE / Windsurf Integration

Under MCP Settings, add a new stdio transport:
- **Command:** `npx -y mcp-server-domain-evaluator`

---

## 📦 Local Installation & Development

```bash
npm install -g mcp-server-domain-evaluator
```

Or run directly via stdio:
```bash
npx mcp-server-domain-evaluator
```

---

## 📄 License

MIT License. Developed for the global AI agent and domain ecosystem.

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Scored across 2 tools

Disambiguation5/5

The two tools target clearly distinct evaluation dimensions: brand quality heuristics versus category/trademark risk screening. There is no apparent overlap in purpose, so an agent can easily select the correct tool.

Naming Consistency5/5

Both tool names use a consistent snake_case, verb-first convention: evaluate_brand_quality and screen_category_vs_trademark. The pattern is predictable and readable.

Tool Count3/5

Two tools is thin for a domain evaluator, as it likely needs additional checks such as availability, length, TLD suitability, or SEO considerations. The count is borderline rather than clearly appropriate.

Completeness3/5

The surface covers brand quality and trademark screening but omits other common domain evaluation operations like availability, extension checks, length scoring, or bulk evaluation. These gaps are notable for the stated server purpose.

Maintenance

ActivityMaintained
ResponsivenessNo issues