porkbun-mcp-server

update_auto_renew

Toggle auto-renewal for a domain. Provide a reason for the change to maintain an audit trail.

Instructions

Toggle auto-renewal for domain. auto_renew=True enables, False disables. reason is required; audit row action=AUTO_RENEW.

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": {
      "domain": "<domain>",
      "auto_renew": "<auto_renew>",
      "reason": "<reason>"
    },
    "name": "update_auto_renew"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`domain`	Yes
`reason`	Yes
`auto_renew`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.5.0Jul 8, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. States that `reason` is required and audit row action is `AUTO_RENEW`, indicating logging behavior. Does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether toggling impacts billing immediately) or potential destructive aspects (but toggling is inherently mutating, not destructive). Adequate for a simple toggle.

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?

Two clear sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the core action and follows with parameter details. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, description covers key aspects: purpose, primary parameter semantics, and audit note. Lacks return value info (e.g., success/error response) and prerequisites, but for a simple toggle it is nearly complete. Minor gap in explaining what happens on success.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so description must add meaning. It explains `auto_renew` as boolean toggle, `reason` as required for audit trail, and `domain` as the target. Adds clarity beyond the schema's raw types and titles, though could mention `domain` format expectations.

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?

Describes a specific verb ('Toggle') and resource ('auto-renewal for domain'). Clearly explains boolean behavior with `auto_renew=True/False`. Distinguishes from siblings like update_glue or update_name_servers by focusing on a distinct domain setting.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives. Does not mention prerequisites (e.g., domain must exist, user permissions) or scenarios where this tool is preferred over other domain management tools. Implied usage is toggling auto-renewal, but no exclusions or context.

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

Deploy Server