Delete a specific DNS record from a domain's zone by providing the domain, subdomain, and record type to remove outdated or incorrect entries.
Delete a DNS resource record from a domain zone.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| content | No | Record content to delete (optional, for precision) | |
| subdomain | Yes | Subdomain (use "@" for root) | |
| domain_name | Yes | Domain name | |
| record_type | Yes | DNS record type |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only states the action. It does not disclose whether deletion is irreversible, what happens if the record is not found, whether permissions or confirmations are required, or how multiple matching records are handled.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The action and resource are stated immediately.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a destructive operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It omits safety context, error behavior, and any indication of what a successful deletion returns, leaving key agent decisions unsupported.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level information, which is acceptable at baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description gives a specific verb and resource ('Delete a DNS resource record from a domain zone'), making the operation immediately understandable. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like regru_add_dns_record or regru_update_domain_dns, so it stops short of a 5.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The agent is left to infer that deletion is appropriate only when a record should be removed.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.