Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Proof Holdings

by holdings.proof
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

delete_domain_verification

Destructive

Delete a domain verification attempt that is not verified (pending, verifying or failed) — nothing is revoked. A verified domain, or one that needs re-verification, is refused with domain_verified: removing it revokes its proofs and every delegation issued from it, which is delete_domain in a start_login session (or the dashboard).

ACCESS: needs a Proof account. Authenticate this client (Claude Code: /mcp → Authenticate), then call this tool again. start_login does NOT open this tool.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_domain_verification"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesDomain verification ID (24 hex characters)

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe id of the deleted domain verification
deletedYesThe domain verification was deleted

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "deleted": {
+      "const": true,
+      "description": "The domain verification was deleted",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "description": "The id of the deleted domain verification",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "deleted",
+    "id"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the destructiveHint annotation: it discloses the refusal behavior and error code for verified domains, that the operation revokes no proofs or delegations in the permitted case, and that a Proof account with an authenticated client is required (with a concrete remediation path). It also notes start_login does not grant access, which is a non-obvious auth constraint.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The key constraint (nothing is revoked; verified domains refused) is front-loaded and there is no filler. The second sentence is long and chains several clauses (refusal, revocation semantics, sibling redirect) that push readability toward the limit, but every clause carries real information.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a one-parameter destructive tool with annotations and an output schema present, the description covers the remaining burden: auth prerequisites, refusal conditions, side effects, and the alternative tool. Nothing an agent needs before invoking it is missing.

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?

There is a single required parameter with 100% schema description coverage ('Domain verification ID (24 hex characters)'), so the schema already carries the semantics. The description adds no format, sourcing, or lookup guidance for the id beyond what the schema says, which is the baseline for full coverage.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (delete a domain verification attempt) and immediately bounds the scope to unverified attempts (pending, verifying, failed). It explicitly contrasts with delete_domain, so the agent can tell the two apart without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit when-to-use (unverified attempt, nothing revoked) and when-not (verified or needs-re-verification domains are refused with domain_verified). It names the correct alternative (delete_domain in a start_login session, or the dashboard) for the excluded case.

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

All Proof Holdings toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources