mcp-infoblox

delete_zone

Remove a DNS authoritative zone from Infoblox by providing its object reference. Supports zone deletion for network management.

Instructions

Delete a DNS authoritative zone from 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": {
      "ref": "<ref>"
    },
    "name": "delete_zone"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ref`	Yes	Object reference of the zone to delete (e.g., zone_auth/ZG5z...)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.1Mar 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool is destructive ('Delete') but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether associated records are deleted), required permissions, reversibility, or error conditions.

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?

Description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

The description lacks explanation of return values, error handling, or what happens if the zone contains records. For a deletion tool, more context on behavior (e.g., cascading deletes) would improve completeness.

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 'ref' with a schema description. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Since schema coverage is 100%, baseline 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?

Description clearly states the action (Delete), the specific resource (DNS authoritative zone), and the context (from Infoblox). It distinguishes from siblings like delete_dns_record, which deletes a record, not a zone.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use or prerequisites. However, the purpose is straightforward and there is no sibling tool with overlapping functionality, so usage is implied but not elaborated.

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