Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@proof-holdings/mcp-server

@proof-holdings/mcp-server

Official
by ProofHoldings
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

delete_dns_credential

Destructive

Remove a stored DNS provider credential to revoke automated domain verification access; domains relying on it will require new credentials before verification can continue.

Instructions

Delete a stored DNS provider credential. Domains using this credential will need new credentials for automated verification.

ACCESS: needs a Proof account. Set PROOF_API_KEY and restart this server, or sign in with start_login — a session opens this tool — then call this tool again.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesDNS credential ID to delete

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
messageNo
successYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.7.2
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "description": "Generic success response",
+  "properties": {
+    "message": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "success": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "success"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description goes beyond that by disclosing the downstream effect on domain verification and the auth prerequisite (PROOF_API_KEY or a start_login session). It stops short of saying whether deletion is reversible or what happens if the ID is unknown, which for a destructive operation would be valuable.

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 core action and its consequence are front-loaded in two tight sentences, which is exactly right. The trailing access instructions are necessary but syntactically dense, stacking a restart path, a login path, and a retry step into one sentence.

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 single-parameter destructive tool with full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, the description covers the essential concerns: impact on dependent domains and authentication requirements. Missing only edge-case behaviour, such as errors for nonexistent IDs or whether the deletion can be undone.

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?

Only one parameter exists and its schema description ("DNS credential ID to delete") already covers it at 100% coverage, so the baseline of 3 applies. The prose adds no format, source, or lookup guidance for the id beyond what the schema states.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a precise verb plus resource, "Delete a stored DNS provider credential," which clearly separates it from create_dns_credential and list_dns_credentials. It never names a sibling or explicitly contrasts itself with neighbouring deletion tools such as delete_domain, so it sits just short of full differentiation.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: an agent can infer this is for removing a credential that is no longer needed, and the second sentence warns about consequences for domains relying on it. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-to-avoid guidance, and no named alternative for replacing a credential instead of deleting it.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools