vercel-mcp-pro

delete_dns_record

Remove a DNS record from a domain using its record ID. Requires domain name and record ID.

Instructions

Delete a DNS record from a domain by record id.

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

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`domain`	Yes	Domain name.
`recordId`	Yes	DNS record id (rec_...).
`teamId`	No	Team ID to scope the request. Falls back to VERCEL_TEAM_ID when omitted.
`slug`	No	Team slug to scope the request (alternative to teamId).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jun 11, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations provided and the description does not disclose behavioral traits like irreversibility, required permissions, or error states. For a destructive action, this is a critical omission.

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 description is a single, clear sentence at 11 words. It is front-loaded and efficient, though could benefit from a bit more context without becoming verbose.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks information about return values, error handling, or dependencies (e.g., record existence).

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all 4 parameters. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 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 (Delete), the resource (DNS record from a domain), and the identifier (by record id). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_dns_record, update_dns_record, and list_dns_records by specifying deletion.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as removal via domain removal or other deletion tools. No context about prerequisites or when not to use it.

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

Deploy Server