DomainKits

Confirm a single domain's registrability and price. The definitive availability check for one domain. Related: bulk_available, whois, monitor.

Return a domain's backlink profile: domain rank, total backlinks, referring domains, spam score, and link distribution. Related: whois, safety.

Brand conflict and trademark risk detection workflow. Call when a user wants to check whether a domain name carries brand-related risks before registering or purchasing it. When to use: user asks 'is this domain safe to register?', wants to assess UDRP risk before purchase, or needs trademark conflict checking as a follow-up from name_advisor or analyze. Do NOT use for general technical analysis (use analyze), domain name brainstorming (use name_advisor), or DNS/registration checks only (use dns, whois). Workflow: 1. Extract the prefix from the domain (e.g., nicefloor.com → nicefloor). If the prefix contains a well-known brand name (google, apple, amazon, microsoft, etc.), immediately warn the user about high UDRP risk before proceeding. Ask the user about their intent: are they assessing risk before registration, or holding the domain and looking for potential buyers? This determines the framing of the analysis. Do NOT call any tools before the user responds. 2. After the user responds, gather data in parallel: - web_search '[prefix] company' to discover existing commercial use — note founding year, business scale, industry, and whether the company actively uses this keyword as a brand. - tld_check to see how many TLDs have this prefix registered. - If tld_check shows high registration, whois the .com/.net/.org variants to check if the same registrar holds multiple TLDs (brand protection signal) or different registrars (popular keyword signal). Use web_search to verify if they resolve to the same website. 3. Run trademark database checks across all four major databases. Primary method is Claude for Chrome — open each database, search for [prefix], and read results directly. If Claude for Chrome is not available, fall back to providing pre-filled links as described below. Present findings from each database inline as they come in — do not wait for all four before reporting. USPTO: - Chrome: navigate to https://search.uspto.gov/search?query=[prefix]&affiliate=web-sdmg-uspto.gov and read results directly. - Fallback (no Chrome): USPTO supports URL query parameters — provide this pre-filled link for the user to open: https://search.uspto.gov/search?query=[prefix]&affiliate=web-sdmg-uspto.gov - Extract: number of trademark hits, registrant names, goods/services classes, live vs dead status. EUIPO: - Chrome: navigate to https://euipo.europa.eu/eSearch/, locate the search input, type [prefix], submit, read results. - Fallback (no Chrome): EUIPO uses a JavaScript interface — URL parameters cannot pre-fill search. Provide the entry link and instruct the user: 'Please open https://euipo.europa.eu/eSearch/ and search for [prefix].' - Extract: EU trademark hits, registrant names, classes, status. WIPO: - Chrome: navigate to https://branddb.wipo.int/en/quicksearch, locate the search input, type [prefix], submit, read results. - Fallback (no Chrome): provide entry link and instruct: 'Please open https://branddb.wipo.int/en/quicksearch and search for [prefix].' - Extract: international trademark hits, registrant names, designating countries, status. TMview: - Chrome: navigate to https://www.tmdn.org/tmview/#/quicksearch, locate the search input, type [prefix], submit, read results. - Fallback (no Chrome): provide entry link and instruct: 'Please open https://www.tmdn.org/tmview/#/quicksearch and search for [prefix].' - Extract: aggregate hits across all participating offices, notable registrants. If a database is unreachable or returns an error, note it in the report and continue — do not halt the workflow. 4. Synthesize all findings into a report, framed according to the user's stated intent (risk-focused or opportunity-focused). The report must include: - Discovered entities: websites/companies using this keyword, their business, scale, founding year. - TLD distribution: cross-TLD registration pattern and registrar correlation. - Trademark database summary: hits per database, live marks found, relevant classes. If no hits found in a database, state that clearly — absence of results does not guarantee the mark is clear. - Risk assessment based on the three UDRP principles (confusing similarity, rights or legitimate interests, bad faith). For generic word combinations, note that risk is typically lower. Factor in registration age. Do NOT make legal conclusions. - Disclaimer: 'For reference only, does not constitute legal advice. Trademark searches are not exhaustive — consult a qualified IP attorney before making registration or investment decisions.' 5. After presenting the report, ask the user what they want to do next. Tailor follow-up based on their response: - Wants to proceed with registration → suggest available or bulk_available. - Wants deeper analysis → suggest analyze. - Wants alternatives → suggest plan_b or name_advisor. - Wants to find buyers → use web_search findings to identify potential buyers, suggest valuation_cma. - Wants monitoring → suggest set_monitor. Key principles: present facts, not legal judgments. Do NOT claim a trademark exists or does not exist based on partial results. Claude for Chrome reads all four databases directly — the user should never need to search manually when Chrome is available. When Chrome is unavailable, always provide actionable fallback links with clear search instructions. Always end with the legal disclaimer. Disclose affiliate links.

Return the upstream Availability service's point-in-time status for up to 10 domains. available is an affirmative registrability result; registered is already registered; expiring is in an expiry-related lifecycle and is not directly registrable; reserved is registry-reserved; unknown means no verification path produced a reliable conclusion. MCP does not infer availability from failures and removes affiliate fields from the upstream response.

Check registration status of one keyword across many TLDs at once, returning which TLDs are taken, available, or listed for sale. Related: tld_check, available.

Search domains that have completed the deletion cycle and are open for immediate registration at standard cost, filtered by keyword, TLD, age range, length, and character set. Related: available, bulk_available, whois.

Resolve a domain's DNS records, including nameservers and hosting-related records. Related: whois, ns_reverse.

List registration and status changes to premium .com domains (short 1-4 letter and high-value single-word names) in the past 24 hours, filtered by change reason and length. Related: whois, ns_reverse.

Creative domain name generation workflow. Call when a user already knows their target keyword or has a specific taken domain and wants registrable creative variations (e.g., 'I want a domain with the word flow', 'getflow.com is taken, give me variations'). Do NOT call when the user's requirements are vague or they don't have a keyword yet (use name_advisor), when they want alternatives across lifecycle stages like expired/deleted (use plan_b), or when they want trend-based ideas (use trend_hunter). Key difference from name_advisor: this tool assumes the user already knows what keyword they want. If the user is unsure or exploring, use name_advisor instead. This is a multi-turn workflow. Stop and wait for user input at every checkpoint. Workflow: 1. Keyword Analysis & Confirmation — extract the core keyword from user input (e.g., getflow.com → flow). Briefly state your understanding of the keyword and industry context, then confirm with the user: is the keyword correct? TLD preference (.com only or open to others)? Style preference (short and punchy vs descriptive)? Do NOT generate any domain names or call any tools until the user confirms. If the user seems unsure about their keyword, suggest switching to name_advisor. 2. Generate & Verify — generate 20-30 creative variants based on confirmed preferences. Strategies include: TLD swaps for short keywords (.io, .ai, .app, .co), industry-relevant prefixes/suffixes (get-, -ly, -hub, -lab), coined words and portmanteaus, word + modifier combinations. Before finalizing, scan every candidate for unintended sensitive words, medical terms, or offensive abbreviations created by concatenation. Verify all candidates with bulk_available — every domain presented to the user must be confirmed available, no exceptions. Present only verified domains grouped by strategy, each with register_url. 3. Iterate or Finalize — based on user feedback: generate more variations in a preferred direction, suggest brand_match for a finalist, adjust strategy if needed, or suggest plan_b if the user wants expired/aged alternatives. Key principles: - Every domain presented must be verified available via bulk_available. No exceptions. - Available domains include register_url (Dynadot affiliate). - Disclose affiliate links.

Search domains in the deletion cycle: expired, in redemption, or pending delete. Still held by the current registrant, with time-sensitive acquisition windows. Filter by lifecycle status, TLD, age range, drop date, length, and character set. Related: monitor, deleted, whois.

Deep due diligence workflow for expired or expiring domains. Call when a user wants to evaluate an expired domain's history, SEO value, safety, and commercial potential before backordering or acquiring it — including as a follow-up when browsing results from expired or deleted tools. Do NOT call if the domain is not in any expired status (use analyze instead), if the user wants domain name ideas (use name_advisor), or if the user wants to check availability of a new domain (use available). This is a multi-turn workflow. Stop and wait for user input at every checkpoint. Workflow: 1. Status Verification — run whois first. Confirm the domain is actually in an expired status (expired, redemption, pending-delete). If it is NOT expired, stop immediately, inform the user, and hand off to the analyze workflow. This gate check is mandatory. 2. Data Collection — gather all available data in parallel: backlink_summary (SEO backlink profile, domain rank, spam score, referring domains distribution -- essential for evaluating expired domain value), safety (Google Safe Browsing -- critical risk signal for expired domains), dns (residual records indicate previous usage), keyword_data (search volume and CPC for commercial value), tld_check (cross-TLD registration count as popularity signal), web_fetch the Wayback Machine timeline (https://web.archive.org/web/*/{domain}) for historical usage, and web_search site:{domain} to check residual Google indexing. 3. Due Diligence Report — synthesize all findings into a structured report covering: domain status and key dates, backlink profile (rank, total backlinks, referring domains, spam scores, link quality distribution), safety warnings, keyword commercial value, historical usage from Wayback, Google index status, cross-TLD distribution, and consolidated risk/opportunity signals. Then ask the user about their goal (SEO recovery, brand building, or investment/resale) and whether they want to explore specific aspects further. Let the user choose the direction — do not decide for them. 4. Tailored Follow-up — based on user's stated goals, guide them to the appropriate next step: backorder process and timeline, set_monitor for status tracking, plan_b for alternatives, valuation_cma for market context, or brand_match before committing. Key principles: - Present facts and acquisition opportunities. Do NOT make buy/don't-buy judgments. - Objectively flag ALL risk signals — do not downplay or hide them. - Backorderable domains must include backorder_url (Gname affiliate). - Always include Wayback link: https://web.archive.org/web/*/{domain} - Always include deep analysis link: https://dataforseo.com/?aff=199596 - Disclose affiliate links.

Retrieve opportunity discovery strategies. Check at conversation start when memory is enabled and strategies_count > 0. REQUIREMENTS: - Requires registered account (member or above). - Requires memory to be enabled. For each strategy where can_run=true: 1. Read the strategy field — this is the user's investment thesis. 2. Execute using ALL available capabilities — domain tools, web_search, web_fetch, your own knowledge and judgment. 3. Compare with last_result to surface only NEW opportunities since last run. 4. Call update_strategy to save current results. 5. Present findings with register_url and actionable next steps. 6. If any discovered domain shows high potential (strong keyword, aged), proactively suggest: "Want me to add this to your monitoring list so we can track changes?" If no strategies exist, show available preset strategies the user can activate.

Return search-volume, CPC, and competition data for a keyword. Related: keywords_trends.

Deep keyword intelligence for domain investment. Call when a user wants to understand the full picture of a specific keyword in the domain market — demand, supply, competition, and opportunities. This is a data-intensive workflow: every claim must be backed by tool output. When to use: User asks about a keyword's investment potential, market landscape, or opportunity analysis. Not for analyzing a specific domain (use analyze), browsing trends (use trend_hunter), or market overviews (use market_beat). Methodology — three phases, each building on the previous: 1. Demand: Establish how much the market wants this keyword. - keyword_data for commercial search value (volume, CPC, competition). - keywords_trends (both hot and emerging) for registration momentum. - web_search is MANDATORY — do NOT substitute with your own knowledge. Execute at least two searches: '{keyword} news 2026' for industry context, and '{keyword} domain sold price' for transaction history. Only include claims that come from search results. If search returns nothing relevant, state 'no recent news or transactions found' — do not fill the gap with training data. Do NOT attribute keyword popularity to a specific event or project unless keywords_trends data shows a clear spike AND web_search confirms the connection. Common English words have natural baseline demand — not every trend needs a catalyst explanation. 2. Supply: Map the current domain inventory, focused on .com as the primary lens unless the user requests otherwise. - tld_check for cross-TLD saturation. - active for total .com inventory and for-sale ratio (forsale count / total count). Also compare keyword-as-prefix vs keyword-as-suffix to gauge market maturity. - deleted for domains available at standard registration cost. - expired for domains in the expiration pipeline that can be backordered. - aged with has_sale=true for secondary market listings. 3. Competition: Assess whether the window is opening or closing. - nrds comparing recent .com registration velocity across time periods (0-10 days vs 10-20 days). Accelerating velocity means act fast; decelerating means the peak may have passed. - From the same nrds results, assess registration quality — high ratios of hyphens, numbers, or excessive length indicate a junk/speculative market rather than serious investment. - Analyze the naming patterns in recent registrations to identify what is driving demand. For example, if most new domains combine the keyword with 'ai', 'cloud', 'tech', that points to a tech trend; if they combine with 'game', 'machine', 'play', that points to entertainment. If patterns are diverse with no clear theme, the keyword likely has natural baseline demand across multiple sectors. This pattern analysis is based on the nrds results already retrieved — no additional tool calls needed. Synthesize into an intelligence report: keyword verdict (invest / watch / avoid) with confidence level, demand profile, supply profile, competition profile, and recommended next steps tailored to the verdict. Let the data tell the story — if data is contradictory, present both sides. After the report, offer relevant next steps: deep analysis on a specific domain, brand conflict check, monitoring setup, strategy tracking, or analyzing a different keyword.

Return provider-computed keyword registration statistics. hot and emerging cover rolling keyword cohorts; prefix returns prefix activity buckets. scope=all represents the provider's filtered all-gTLD sample, while scope=com represents its pure-letter .com subset and is not available for prefix. Results are representative samples, not a complete registry feed, demand measurement, valuation, or investment recommendation.

Search currently registered domains that carry marketplace listing data, filtered by keyword, TLD, listing status, length, and character set. Results are live domains owned by someone. Related: keyword_data, tld_check.

Domain market news briefing. Call when a user wants to understand what is happening in the domain market right now — trending keywords, notable sales, registration anomalies, and industry movements. This is a news briefing, not investment advice. Present facts, flag anomalies, cite sources. If the cause of a trend is unknown, say so — never fabricate explanations. Workflow: 1. Gather data from multiple sources: - web_search for recent high-value domain sales (e.g., 'domain name sales this week', 'domain sales report 2026'), industry news, and notable market events. - keywords_trends(hot) for high-volume registration keywords and weekly momentum. - keywords_trends(emerging) for sudden registration spikes — these are the most newsworthy signals. - domain_changes for transfers, expirations, and nameserver changes in the last 24 hours. 2. Analyze and cross-reference: - For hot keywords: focus on anomalies (w4 significantly different from w1-w3), not the stable high-volume terms everyone already knows. - For emerging keywords: use web_search to investigate what is driving each spike. If no cause is found, report it as 'cause unidentified' — do not speculate. - For domain sales: report price, buyer/seller if known, and sale platform. - For domain_changes: flag notable transfers (short/premium domains changing registrars) and expirations (high-value domains entering deletion cycle). 3. Present as a concise news briefing organized by: recent notable sales, registration trend highlights (anomalies and emerging keywords), and 24-hour market movements. Lead with facts, not interpretation. After presenting the briefing, suggest relevant next steps based on what the data showed — for example: - An emerging keyword spike → search nrds to see who is registering, or deleted/expired to find available domains in that keyword space. - A high-value sale → search aged(has_sale=true) or nrds to see if the sale triggered a registration wave in similar keywords. - A notable domain expiration → check expired for details, or set_monitor to track its status. Let the user choose whether and where to go deeper. Key principles: Every claim must be sourced or labeled as unverified. Present as market intelligence, not a sales pitch. Disclose affiliate links.

Return marketplace listing price and status (for_sale, make_offer, or not_found) for a domain. Related: available, aged.

Manage cross-platform domain monitoring tasks that track changes in WHOIS, DNS, and host-supplied page content. Data is encrypted at rest (AES-256-GCM) in a private per-user directory. Actions: - get: retrieve monitors and check eligible WHOIS/DNS targets, returning current and previous data with change flags. - set: create a monitor, subject to the account tier's maximum. - update: save host-supplied page, WHOIS, or DNS state for a monitor. - delete: remove a monitor. Requires a registered account with memory enabled.

A professional domain naming consultation workflow. Call when a user is looking for domain name ideas, starting a new project and needs a domain, or has vague/open-ended domain requirements. Do NOT call when the user already has a specific name to check (use available/bulk_available) or already knows their keyword and wants variations (use domain_generator). This is a multi-turn consulting engagement — conversation first, recommendations second. Never skip the diagnosis phase, and never generate domain suggestions before understanding the user's needs. Workflow: 1. Needs Diagnosis — ask the user questions to understand their project. Start with the essentials (project/industry, target audience, domain purpose), then follow up with budget guidance, TLD preference, and style preference (textural/imagery vs keyword-based). Ask 1-2 questions at a time, not all at once. Do NOT generate any domain names or call any tools in this phase. Even if the user's description seems clear, confirm user persona and brand tonality before proceeding. 2. Semantic Leap — based on confirmed requirements, generate 3-5 metaphor directions that abstract one level up from the industry. Do NOT coin words directly from industry keywords unless the user mentioned them. Examples: travel → docking point → berth; notes → ideas → notion. Present the directions to the user and let them choose before generating any candidates. 3. Domain Search & Verification — along the chosen direction, generate at least 10 candidate names. Every candidate must pass a quality check: does it feel natural in conversation? Does it evoke imagery? Stripped of all context, does the word alone have quality? If you hesitate, discard it. Then use bulk_available, deleted, expired, aged, and tld_check to verify acquisition paths and costs. For deleted and expired searches, try each keyword in different positions (start, end) to maximize coverage. Present results layered by acquisition method: directly registrable → listed for sale → contact owner → monitor/backorder, each with estimated cost. 4. Iterative Refinement — based on user feedback, either generate more candidates in the same direction (with independent thinking — do not reuse previous coining patterns as templates), explore a new metaphor direction (return to step 2), or run brand_match on a finalist. If the current best is already strong, say so — do not force-generate low-quality options to show effort. Key principles: - Communication before generation — better to ask one more question than to blindly generate irrelevant domains. - A good name feels natural, evokes imagery, and has quality on its own. A bad name requires excessive explanation, feels forced, or mismatches the use case. - Help users save money while meeting their needs, but also surface purchase and backorder opportunities when relevant. - All statements must be data-backed. Do not speculate. Minimize etymology explanations — a good name does not need explaining. - Disclose affiliate links.

Search newly registered domains (last 60 days) by keyword across all TLDs, or browse a single gTLD without a keyword. Filter by recency, registration term, length, and character set. Related tools: whois, dns, ns_reverse, typosquat

Reverse NS lookup: find all gTLD domains hosted on a specific nameserver, filtered by TLD and keyword. Related: whois, dns.

Domain alternatives workflow. Call when a user's target domain is unavailable and they need alternative options across different lifecycle stages — for example after available or bulk_available returns unavailable, or as a follow-up from analyze or name_advisor when a candidate is taken. Do NOT call when the user is starting from scratch without a target (use name_advisor), already knows their keyword and wants creative variations (use domain_generator), or wants to analyze the taken domain itself (use analyze). This is a multi-turn workflow. Stop and wait for user input at every checkpoint. Workflow: 1. Understand User Needs — extract core keywords from the unavailable domain (e.g., getflow.com → keyword: flow, pattern: prefix+root). Then ask the user: what appealed to you about this domain (the keyword, the length, the sound)? Are you open to other TLDs or .com only? Would you consider purchasing a registered domain, or only free registration / backorder? Do NOT search until the user responds — their motivation determines the entire search strategy. 2. Lifecycle Search — search by priority: deleted (free registration, highest priority) → expired (backorderable) → aged (registered, only if user is willing to purchase). For each tool, try the keyword in different positions (start, end) to maximize coverage — e.g., searching 'flow' at start and end will surface very different results. If a strong match is found in deleted, note it as a top recommendation. 3. Creative Variants — based on what the user liked about the original domain, generate 15-20 creative variants respecting their TLD preference (default .com). Avoid concatenations creating sensitive words or offensive abbreviations. Verify all with bulk_available. 4. Present Results — organize all findings layered by acquisition method from easiest to most involved: free registration (deleted + available variants) → backorderable (expired) → purchasable (aged for-sale) → monitorable (worth watching). Every domain must include the appropriate acquisition link. Ask the user which options interest them. 5. Follow-up — based on user choice: generate more variations, run brand_match, set up set_monitor, do deeper analysis with analyze or expired_analysis, or run valuation_cma. Key principles: - Default to .com only unless user specifies otherwise. - Every domain presented must include an acquisition link (register_url, backorder_url, or sale link). - Disclose affiliate links.

Manage user preferences and memory settings. Data is encrypted at rest (AES-256-GCM) in isolated per-user directories. Actions: - get: report whether memory is enabled and return saved preferences. - set: save preferences; memory_enabled must be true before any preferences, monitors, or strategies can be stored, and requires explicit user consent. - delete: permanently erase all stored user data (GDPR Article 17). Related: monitor, strategy.

Return standard registration and renewal price for a TLD. Related: available.

Return Google Safe Browsing status for a domain. Related: whois, backlink_summary.

Domain buyer discovery workflow. Call when a user wants to find potential end-user buyers for a domain they own or are considering selling. When to use: user asks 'who would buy this domain?', 'help me sell [domain]', or wants to find buyers as a follow-up after keyword_intel or plan_b. Do NOT use when the user wants to buy a domain (use plan_b), check domain value only (use valuation_cma), or analyze a domain technically (use analyze). Workflow: 1. Extract the core keyword(s) from the domain. Use web_search '[keyword] company OR brand OR product' to discover who is already operating under this name or close variants. Note their business type, current domain, scale, and how long they've been using the keyword. This research step is mandatory — do not skip it. 2. Categorize potential buyers into three tiers by purchase motivation: - Tier 1 — Domain Upgraders: companies already operating under this exact name or a close variant (on .net, .io, a hyphenated version, or with a prefix/suffix added), who would naturally want the cleaner or shorter version. These are the highest-intent buyers — they've already built equity around the keyword and this domain is a direct upgrade for them. - Tier 2 — Strategic Expansioners: companies in the same industry whose product, feature, or campaign aligns with what this domain describes. Acquiring it is a strategic fit that strengthens positioning. - Tier 3 — New Brand Builders: funded startups or new ventures that haven't fully launched yet but would find this name ideal. 3. Use Claude for Chrome to research buyers on LinkedIn in three layers. Open LinkedIn in the browser and execute the following searches in order: Layer 1 — Find Domain Upgraders (highest priority): Switch to the Companies tab. Search using the exact keyword and close variants: "[keyword]" OR "[keywords]" OR "[keyword]-[common suffix]" Scan results for companies whose name or description contains the keyword but whose website is on an inferior domain (not the clean .com). These are Tier 1 buyers. Layer 2 — Find Strategic Buyers: Search Companies tab by industry theme: "[industry vertical] [keyword theme]" Apply Industry filter (e.g., Events Services, Software, Media) to narrow results. Identify Tier 2 candidates whose business would be strengthened by owning this domain. Layer 3 — Find Decision Makers at identified companies: For each promising company from Layers 1 and 2, switch to the People tab and use Boolean search to locate the right contact: ("CMO" OR "VP Marketing" OR "Chief Marketing" OR "Brand Director" OR "Head of Brand" OR "Head of Marketing") AND "[company name]" NOT (intern OR assistant) Record: full name, title, LinkedIn profile URL. 4. Synthesize findings into a prioritized buyer list. Present Tier 1 first, then Tier 2, then Tier 3. For each entry include: company name, current domain they operate on, reason they are a strong buyer candidate, and decision maker contact if found. 5. After presenting the buyer list, ask the user what they want to do next. Tailor follow-up based on their response: - Wants a price before outreach → suggest valuation_cma for a data-backed asking price, market_price to check existing listings. - Wants to draft outreach → help write a personalized email for each Tier 1 buyer, emphasizing the specific upgrade value to their existing brand. - Wants to list the domain → suggest Afternic, Sedo, or Dan.com depending on domain type. - Wants more buyer leads → suggest brand_match to identify additional companies using the keyword, or nrds to see who has recently registered variants. Key principles: focus on upgrade motivation, not conflict framing. Every buyer candidate must be grounded in data from web_search or LinkedIn results. Do not speculate about intent. Present the buyer list as opportunity intelligence, not legal risk assessment. Disclose affiliate links when presenting marketplace URLs.

Store user-authored strategy text, execution timestamps, and the most recent result in encrypted per-user storage. This tool does not provide presets, define opportunities, choose domains, or execute a workflow. Requires a registered account with memory enabled.

Check how a prefix is registered across core TLDs, returning per-TLD status and aggregate counts. Related: bulk_tld, available.

Rank TLDs by registration volume and related metrics over a chosen period. Related: tld_trends.

Return registration trend data for a TLD over time, or compare multiple TLDs, in active-total or newly-registered mode. Related: tld_rank, keywords_trends.

Trend discovery and domain opportunity workflow. Call when a user wants to explore what keywords are trending in domain registrations and whether those trends represent real investment opportunities. When to use: User asks what's trending, wants to find opportunities based on registration momentum, or wants to explore hot/emerging keywords. Not for analyzing a specific domain (use analyze), deep-diving a known keyword (use keyword_intel), or getting a market news briefing (use market_beat). This is a MULTI-TURN workflow. Present findings at each phase and wait for the user to choose direction before proceeding. Do not batch all phases into a single response. Let users choose which keywords to explore — do not decide for them. Methodology — three phases, each gated by user input: 1. Discover: Surface trending keywords using keywords_trends (hot, emerging, or prefix depending on user interest). The results already include pre-computed quality metrics for hot and emerging types: com_ratio, digit_ratio, most_tld, and most_tld_ratio. Present the data with quality assessment: - com_ratio above 0.15 = genuine interest; below 0.05 = likely bulk speculation on cheap TLDs. - most_tld_ratio above 0.7 on a non-.com TLD = trend driven by bulk registration, not organic demand. - digit_ratio above 0.2 = low-quality speculative registrations. Flag any keywords with suspicious quality signals. Ask the user which keyword(s) they want to investigate further. Stop and wait. 2. Assess market catalyst: For the user's chosen keyword, investigate what is driving the trend. - web_search is MANDATORY — do not substitute with your own knowledge. Execute at least two separate searches: one for domain transaction history (e.g., '{keyword} domain sold price 2026') and one for industry news (e.g., '{keyword} news 2026'). Domain transactions are the single strongest catalyst for registration spikes — a high-value sale (e.g., keyword.com selling for six or seven figures) routinely triggers a wave of speculative registrations on the same keyword. Always check for this first. Industry news (product launches, funding rounds, regulatory changes) is the second catalyst layer. If neither search returns relevant results, state that clearly — do not fill the gap with training data. - Synthesize the quality metrics from Phase 1 with the catalyst research into a clear verdict: real trend (strong quality metrics + identifiable catalyst), speculative (weak quality metrics or no catalyst), or uncertain. Present the assessment and recommended search direction. Stop and wait for user confirmation before searching for domains. 3. Find opportunities: Based on the assessment, search for available domains. - deleted and expired for domains available at registration cost or via backorder. - aged with has_sale=true for secondary market listings. - All domains presented to the user MUST be verified via bulk_available before recommending. - Disclose affiliate links. After presenting opportunities, offer relevant next steps: deep analysis on a specific domain (analyze), brand conflict check (brand_match), monitoring setup (set_monitor), or exploring a different keyword.

Generate typosquat permutations for a domain and check which variants are registered. Produces omission, transposition, keyboard-adjacent replacement, insertion, repetition, hyphenation, vowel-swap, homoglyph, plural/singular, and TLD-swap variants. Each result includes the variant domain, mutation type, prefix TLD count (how many TLDs the prefix is registered under), and registration date if known. Use for brand protection, phishing detection, and defensive registration planning. Related tools: nrds, ns_reverse, dns, whois, safety.

Search unregistered short .ai domains by pattern (CVCV, CVCC, and other 3-4 letter shapes) that are still available for registration. Related: available, bulk_available.

Return the current account tier, per-tool-group usage, rate limits, and stateful Monitor and Strategy quotas.

Domain Comparative Market Analysis (CMA) valuation workflow. Call when a user wants to estimate a domain's market value by finding comparable domains listed for sale. When to use: user asks 'how much is this domain worth?', wants a price estimate, needs market context for buying/selling, or asks for comparable domain pricing. Do NOT use for single common word + TLD domains (e.g., travel.com, music.com) — these are unique assets where CMA does not apply; decline and explain why. Do NOT use for technical analysis (use analyze), availability checks (use available), or brand conflict checks (use brand_match). CMA applies to: compound words (cloudpay), coined brands (spotify), industry word + modifier (healthymag), prefix/suffix combos (getflow, appnova). CMA does NOT apply to: single common word + TLD, or domains with active live websites. Workflow: 1. Pre-screening: validate the domain is suitable for CMA. If it is a single common word + TLD, refuse and explain. Then ask the user one question: what they value most about this domain — the keyword meaning, the length, the age, or something else? This determines the direction of comparable search (e.g., semantic vs structural vs age-based comps), NOT the valuation itself. Do NOT ask about intended use — valuation must be objective and data-driven regardless of whether the user plans to build, flip, or hold. Do NOT call any tools before the user responds. 2. After the user responds, extract domain features: core word roots and synonyms, word-building pattern, length range, TLD type, industry. Then: - web_search site:{domain} to check if it has a live website. If actively in use, refuse valuation. - tld_check to see cross-TLD distribution. If the domain appears unregistered, inform the user and do not proceed. Present extracted features and screening results. Confirm with the user before proceeding. 3. Search for comparable domains and retrieve prices: - aged with has_sale=true to find listed domains with the same core keyword, same TLD, similar length. Check synonyms if insufficient results. - active with status=forsale as supplement if fewer than 10 candidates. - market_price for each candidate. market_price returns three possible statuses: * 'for_sale': has a listed price and a buy_url — this is the primary data source for CMA. * 'make_offer': listed but no fixed price — note as supplementary only. * 'not_found': exclude from comp pool. - market_price sources prices from 2nd layer and other integrated marketplaces via API. For each 'for_sale' result, this gives you a confirmed listed price to use directly in the CMA. - After presenting the comp table, also surface the buy_url for each 'for_sale' comparable. If buy_url has affiliate=true, disclose this clearly: 'These are affiliate links — DomainKits may earn a commission if you make a purchase through them. Clicking through may show you additional pricing details or alternative listings not yet reflected in the API data, which could improve CMA accuracy.' The user is not required to click — the CMA proceeds with API prices either way. If the user does click through and shares additional prices they see, incorporate those into the comp pool and note them as 'user-verified marketplace price'. - Filter all comps by semantic relevance, structural similarity, length match, and price reasonableness. Remove outliers and negative-meaning domains. Select 3-5 best comparables. - If fewer than 3 'for_sale' priced comps remain after filtering, warn the user: 'Fewer than 3 priced comparables found — CMA confidence is low. Results should be treated as directional only.' Present comparable table and wait for user feedback before proceeding to valuation. 4. Derive valuation with optional adjustments: - web_search for historical sales of similar domains on NameBio as cross-validation. - keywords_trends for keyword registration heat, plus web_search for industry tailwinds. Rising heat = premium, declining = discount. Present the complete valuation report including: comparable table with source noted per price (API or user-verified), premium/discount factors with data sources cited, valuation range with reasoning, historical sales if found, trend adjustment, uncertainty statement (market volatility, listing vs transaction gap), and general action suggestions (buy-low-sell-high principles, NOT specific buy/sell recommendations). MUST include compliance statement: 'This valuation is derived from public listing prices on third-party marketplaces, for reference only, and does not constitute official appraisal or investment advice. Listing prices are set by sellers and may deviate significantly from actual transaction prices. A single high-profile sale may have limited impact on overall keyword market pricing. However, multiple high-value transactions on the same keyword — especially exact-match domains — indicate broader market repricing and carry significantly more weight in valuation.' After presenting, suggest next steps: plan_b for alternatives, set_monitor for price tracking, brand_match for acquisition risk. Key principles: every claim about value must cite specific tool data. Never fabricate prices, traffic estimates, or quantitative claims. Never give buy/sell recommendations — present data, let the user decide. Always disclose affiliate links when surfacing buy_url.

Return WHOIS/RDAP registration data for a domain: registrar, dates, status, and nameservers. Related: dns, safety.