Skip to main content
Glama

Remove a custom domain from a site

remove_site_domain
DestructiveIdempotent

Remove a custom domain from a hosted site. A moment later the domain serves no more pages and SHIP deletes its certificate; until then its status reads 'removing'. Requires the config:write capability.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "siteId": "<siteId>",
      "hostname": "<hostname>"
    },
    "name": "remove_site_domain"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteIdYesSite id from list_sites
hostnameYesThe custom domain, e.g. 'blog.example.com'

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint, idempotentHint), the description discloses the asynchronous lifecycle: the domain keeps serving briefly, then SHIP deletes its certificate, with status 'removing' in the interim. It also names the required permission, config:write, which annotations cannot express.

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?

Three short sentences, each contributing distinct information: the action, the delayed-effect semantics, and the authorization requirement. Nothing is redundant and the core action is front-loaded.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a two-parameter destructive tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the essential unknowns — timing, certificate cleanup, and the capability required. It stops short of describing failure modes (unknown hostname, domain not attached, permission denied) that would make it fully self-sufficient.

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%, with siteId pointing at list_sites and hostname giving an example format, so the schema already carries full parameter meaning. The description adds nothing further about the two inputs, which matches the baseline 3 for fully documented schemas.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Remove a custom domain from a hosted site'), and the verb inherently separates it from the sibling domain tools (add_site_domain, verify_site_domain, list_site_domains). An agent can pick this tool without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by the wording — you call this to detach an already-added domain — but the description never names an alternative or states preconditions such as 'the domain must be in an active state' or 'use delete_site to remove the whole site.' No explicit when-not guidance is given.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.