How to check 500 domain names in batches

How do you check 500 candidate domains?

To check 500 candidate domains, validate and deduplicate the list, then split it into supported registrar batches. AIvikings documents up to 200 names per availability call, so 500 unique candidates require three calls. Preserve errors as unknown results, quote selected names, and authorize registration separately from the availability check.

A candidate list of 500 names is small enough to understand as one research task, but it is not necessarily one API operation. The batch size, result format, and failure behavior belong to the registrar interface. The workflow has to preserve the relationship between the original list and every returned result.

The AIvikings domainers page documents availability checks for up to 200 names at a time. For 500 unique, valid candidates, use batches of 200, 200, and 100. That describes availability calls, not a promise that all registrations happen in one transaction.

This is one part of the domain portfolio management workflow, which connects account records, spending decisions, batch execution, and verified results.

How should you prepare the candidate list?

Start with exact domain names, one per row. Remove surrounding whitespace and separate accidental URLs, email addresses, and paths from actual registration candidates. Do not turn an ambiguous value into a purchase target without review.

Deduplicate before splitting the list. Keep the original row identifiers so you can explain which entries were duplicates and where each surviving name came from. If you reduce 500 submitted rows to fewer unique candidates, report both counts. Otherwise, an operator may interpret the smaller result as lost work.

Internationalized names deserve particular care. Preserve the intended spelling and the representation sent to the registrar. Visually similar characters can be different names. A normalization step should not quietly change the brand or project name a person approved.

Add a purpose or shortlist label if it helps the later selection. This is your research metadata, not a registrar field unless the interface explicitly supports it. Keeping the two separate makes it easier to change providers or rerun a check without losing context.

What should each batch return?

Require a result associated with every submitted name. Consult the MCP tools reference for the current input and output contract. Compare returned domain values with the requested set rather than relying only on array position or a success message for the request as a whole.

Use separate categories for available, unavailable, and unresolved results. An unresolved category covers errors, missing entries, and responses that cannot be interpreted reliably. These categories are workflow decisions; they should be mapped from the documented tool output rather than guessed from arbitrary text.

Record the lookup time and currency alongside any price information. A result is an observation, not a permanent property of the name. If the operator makes a purchase decision later, the workflow needs to know how old that observation is.

Check the totals at the end. Available plus unavailable plus unresolved should equal the number of unique submitted candidates. Keep rejected inputs and duplicates in separate totals so they remain visible without contaminating the availability count.

Why not use RDAP 404 as an availability check?

RDAP provides registration data. It is not the registrar purchase interface. ICANN describes its purpose in the RDAP overview. An absent record does not establish that a registrar will accept a registration for that name under current policy and commercial conditions.

Likewise, a domain with no website may already be held, and a failed DNS lookup may simply reflect missing DNS configuration. Neither tells you what the registration transaction would do.

Use public registration data for the questions it answers. Use a registrar availability check and an exact-domain quote before proposing a purchase. If these sources disagree, investigate the discrepancy rather than selecting whichever response matches the desired outcome.

How much concurrency should you use?

Begin conservatively and follow the documented service limits. Three batches do not require three simultaneous calls. A sequential run can be easier to review and recover, particularly when the response already contains many names.

If you introduce concurrency, retain a stable batch identifier and independent results. Completion order may differ from input order. The report should still be grouped by the original names rather than by whichever request happened to finish first.

A temporary error should not cause the entire list to be repeated without inspection. Retry only the relevant read operation according to the service guidance, and preserve the earlier error for diagnosis. A timeout in availability checking is different from a timeout during a paid registration.

How do you move from results to registrations?

Build a shortlist from the confirmed results. Retrieve the current price and supported term for each selected domain. The prices page helps compare the catalog, but the exact candidate and purchase term determine the proposed transaction.

Check the contact, nameservers, currency, and premium status before asking for a decision or applying existing authority. An approval for ordinary candidates should not silently include an unexpected premium name. A maximum batch budget should be evaluated against the whole selected set.

Save the approved shortlist as a new artifact. The research list contains possibilities; the purchase list contains authorized actions. If the assistant generates more ideas after approval, keep them in research until they receive their own decision.

For execution, maintain a result for every approved domain. Do not call a 500-name research job a completed registration batch when only a handful were selected and bought. State exactly how many were checked, selected, attempted, and confirmed.

What should the final report look like?

A useful report begins with counts, then shows the exceptions. For example, it might identify submitted rows, unique valid names, returned results, unresolved lookups, and shortlisted candidates. These are illustrative fields, not fixed AIvikings response keys.

Provide enough detail to rerun only what needs work. Include the affected domains and the nature of each error, with sensitive account data removed. The next operator should not have to reconstruct the original task from chat history.