Skip to main content
Glama
usegranthq

UseGrant MCP Server

Official
by usegranthq

add_domain

Add a domain to a specified provider in the UseGrant MCP Server, ensuring proper domain management within the platform.

Instructions

Add a domain to a provider

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesThe domain of the domain
providerIdYesThe ID of the provider

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that executes the 'add_domain' tool logic by calling the UseGrant SDK's addDomain method and formatting the response.
    async ({ providerId, domain }) => {
      const domainEntity = await usegrant.addDomain(providerId, { domain });
      return {
        content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(domainEntity, null, 2) }],
      };
    },
  • Input schema for the 'add_domain' tool, defining providerId and domain parameters using imported Zod schemas.
    {
      providerId: UgSchema.ProviderIdSchema,
      domain: UgSchema.DomainSchema.shape.domain,
    },
  • src/index.ts:137-150 (registration)
    Registration of the 'add_domain' MCP tool on the server using server.tool() with name, description, input schema, and handler.
    server.tool(
      'add_domain',
      'Add a domain to a provider',
      {
        providerId: UgSchema.ProviderIdSchema,
        domain: UgSchema.DomainSchema.shape.domain,
      },
      async ({ providerId, domain }) => {
        const domainEntity = await usegrant.addDomain(providerId, { domain });
        return {
          content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(domainEntity, null, 2) }],
        };
      },
    );
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the action without behavioral details. It doesn't disclose permissions needed, whether it's idempotent, what happens on duplicate domains, error conditions, or side effects, which are critical for a mutation tool like this.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for the tool's complexity, making it easy to parse quickly.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavior, error handling, return values, and integration with sibling tools, leaving significant gaps for the agent to operate effectively.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining domain format constraints or providerId sourcing, but the baseline is 3 since the schema handles parameter documentation adequately.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the action ('Add') and resource ('domain to a provider'), which gives a basic understanding of purpose. However, it's vague about what 'add' entails operationally and doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'create_provider' or 'verify_domain', leaving ambiguity about scope and differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., provider must exist), exclusions, or relationships with sibling tools like 'delete_domain' or 'verify_domain', leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Related Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/usegranthq/mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server