Skip to main content
Glama

Sitey — free subdomains

by my.sitey
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

delete_txt_record

Delete a TXT verification record from a subdomain you own.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesRoot domain (e.g. 'sitey.my')
subdomainYesSubdomain name (e.g. 'demo')
host_prefixYesTXT record host prefix (e.g. '_vercel')
owner_tokenNoThe owner token you were given when you created the record (starts with anon_). Omit it only if you have an API key, or if the record predates tokens and was claimed from this same IP address. Creating without one mints a new one and returns it once.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / domain / description
      Previous value: -"Root domain (e.g. 'sitey.one')"New value: +"Root domain (e.g. 'sitey.my')"
    • addedInput schema / properties / owner_token
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The owner token you were given when you created the record (starts with anon_). Omit it only if you have an API key, or if the record predates tokens and was claimed from this same IP address. Creating without one mints a new one and returns it once.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action (delete) and ownership requirement, but does not mention that the action is permanent/irreversible, any permission requirements, or side effects on the subdomain itself. For a destructive operation, this is insufficient transparency.

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 sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, then adds the scope condition. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 delete operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimal. It omits irreversible side effects, what happens on success (e.g., confirmation or errors), and any guidance on when to use this tool versus delete_subdomain. Given the tool's complexity (4 params, destructive nature), the description leaves critical context 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully documents all parameters. The description adds the ownership condition ('subdomain you own'), which relates to domain ownership but not to specific parameters. It does not add new meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb (Delete) and resource (TXT verification record) with a clear scope ('from a subdomain you own'). It clearly distinguishes from delete_subdomain, which would delete the subdomain itself, and from create_txt_record. This is not a tautology; it tells the agent exactly what action is performed on what object.

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?

The description implies the tool is used when you need to remove a TXT record from a subdomain you control, but it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like delete_subdomain or provide conditions for when not to use it. It gives clear context (ownership requirement) but no explicit alternatives or exclusions, which is a moderate gap.

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

All Sitey — free subdomains 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