@appouse/godaddy-dns-mcp

Delete DNS records

delete_dns_record

DestructiveIdempotent

Delete all DNS records of a given type and name for a domain. Preview deletion with dry_run before applying.

Instructions

Delete ALL DNS records of a given type and name for a domain. Pass dry_run=true to preview the deletion without applying it.

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>",
      "record_type": "<record_type>",
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "delete_dns_record"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	Record name/subdomain to delete — use "@" for apex/root
`domain`	Yes	The root domain, e.g. "example.com"
`dry_run`	No	When true, make NO call to the GoDaddy API — just describe the change that would be made
`record_type`	Yes	DNS record type: A, AAAA, CNAME, MX, TXT, NS, SRV, CAA, ...

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description goes beyond annotations by emphasizing the 'ALL' scope of deletion and introducing the dry_run preview mechanism. This complements the destructiveHint annotation by explaining exactly what will be destroyed and how to preview it.

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 concise, front-loaded sentences clearly communicate the action, scope, and the dry_run option. No wasted words.

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?

The description is sufficient for a destructive, bulk-delete tool, covering the core behavior and safety preview. Complete schema and annotations (destructiveHint) round out the context, though it could mention reversibility or prerequisites.

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?

All parameters are fully described in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description does not need to repeat them. The baseline of 3 applies since the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 that this tool deletes ALL DNS records of a given type and name for a domain, using specific verbs and scope. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_dns_record, replace_dns_records, and list_dns_records.

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 provides a clear usage context: when you need to remove all records of a type and name, with a dry_run preview option. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the context is clear enough to guide selection.

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

Deploy Server