@kodim/mcp-cloudflare-dns

Get DNSSEC Status

get_dnssec_status

Read-only

Retrieve DNSSEC configuration and status for a Cloudflare zone. Get DS record details required for registrar configuration.

Instructions

Get the DNSSEC configuration and status for a zone. Returns DS record details needed for registrar configuration.

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": {
      "zone_id": "<zone_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_dnssec_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`zone_id`	Yes	The zone ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already communicates the safe read-only nature. The description adds that it 'Returns DS record details needed for registrar configuration,' which is useful output context but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as error handling, permissions, or limits. It neither contradicts annotations nor adds significant behavioral depth.

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 two short sentences, front-loading the primary action and then clarifying the output. Every word is purposeful with no redundancy or filler.

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 simple read-only getter with one parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently conveys the purpose and return value. It does not mention edge cases like zones without DNSSEC enabled, but the tool is simple enough that this is a minor omission.

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?

The schema provides 100% coverage for zone_id with description 'The zone ID.' The tool description does not elaborate further on the parameter, so it adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. The baseline of 3 applies as the schema is fully self-explanatory.

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 clearly states the tool 'Get the DNSSEC configuration and status for a zone' with a specific verb and resource. It further distinguishes itself from siblings like get_dns_record by explicitly mentioning DS record details for registrar configuration, aligning with the DNSSEC-specific sibling names.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description implies usage for retrieving DNSSEC status and DS records, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives. The context of sibling tools (e.g., get_dns_record, update_dnssec_status) makes the use case clear, but explicit exclusions are absent.

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

Deploy Server