mcp-infoblox

create_a_record

Add a DNS A record to Infoblox by providing the hostname and IP address, with optional controls like DNS view, TTL, comment, and disabled status.

Instructions

Create a DNS A record in Infoblox

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": {
      "name": "<name>",
      "ipv4addr": "<ipv4addr>"
    },
    "name": "create_a_record"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	FQDN for the A record (e.g., host.example.com)
`ipv4addr`	Yes	IPv4 address for the record
`view`	No	DNS view (defaults to 'default')
`ttl`	No	TTL in seconds
`comment`	No	Comment for the record
`disable`	No	Create in disabled state

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.1Mar 12, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are present, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as idempotency, conflict handling, or whether the record becomes immediately active. The agent is left without critical behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise (one sentence), but this brevity comes at the cost of omitting important context. It is front-loaded but under-specified.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With no output schema and no annotations, the description fails to mention return values, error conditions, or required parameters (though schema covers required). The tool's context is incomplete for an agent to use effectively.

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 6 parameters are fully described in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description adds no additional meaning. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states 'Create a DNS A record in Infoblox', specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools by naming 'A record', but could add more detail about the mapping function.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_aaaa_record or create_host_record. The agent receives no exclusion criteria or context for selection.

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