OVHcloud MCP Server

ovh_domain_dns_update

Update an existing DNS record by specifying the zone and record ID. Optionally modify subdomain, target, or TTL.

Instructions

Update an existing DNS record

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": {
      "zone": "<zone>",
      "recordId": "<recordId>"
    },
    "name": "ovh_domain_dns_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`zone`	Yes	DNS zone (domain name, e.g. example.com)
`recordId`	Yes	DNS record ID
`subDomain`	No
`target`	No
`ttl`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.1Jun 8, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'update', implying a mutation, but lacks details on side effects, authorization, error cases, or response format.

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?

Single sentence, no wasted words. Appropriate for a simple update operation, though could be slightly more descriptive without losing conciseness.

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?

Given multiple sibling tools and 5 parameters with no output schema, the description is too sparse. It fails to explain the role of optional parameters, success/error behavior, or how the record is identified.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 40% (zone and recordId have descriptions). The tool description adds no parameter explanations, leaving subDomain, target, and ttl entirely undocumented.

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 ('Update') and the resource ('an existing DNS record'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create, delete, or list.

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 (e.g., ovh_domain_dns_create for new records). No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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