controld-mcp

Resume Control D

resume_profile

Destructive

Resume a paused Control D DNS profile immediately after you confirm the change with a boolean true flag.

Instructions

Immediately resume a paused profile. Requires confirm=true.

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": {
      "profile": "<profile>",
      "confirm": "<confirm>"
    },
    "name": "resume_profile"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`confirm`	Yes	Must be exactly true after reviewing the requested change
`profile`	Yes	Exact profile name or profile ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 20, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already disclose readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, and idempotentHint=false, so the mutating nature is known. The description adds the adverb 'Immediately' (indicating speed) and reiterates the confirm requirement, but it does not explain any side effects or consequences of resuming, which is a notable gap given the destructive hint.

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, front-loaded with the core action, and every word contributes meaning. No filler or redundancy, making it exemplary in conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a two-parameter control action with no output schema, the description is adequate but minimal. It states the action and confirmation requirement, yet leaves out preconditions (e.g., what happens if the profile is not paused) and any expected outcome, which could be beneficial for the agent's decision-making.

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% with both 'profile' and 'confirm' well-described. The description adds no new parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score 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 clearly states the action (resume), the target resource (profile), and a condition (paused). It inherently distinguishes from the sibling tool pause_profile by being its inverse, and the specificity of 'paused profile' leaves no ambiguity about purpose.

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 use when a profile is paused but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or mention exclusions. It does not reference sibling tools like pause_profile or list_profiles, leaving the usage context somewhat implied rather than explicit.

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

Deploy Server