nginx-certbot-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

delete_domain_record

DestructiveIdempotent

Deletes the Route 53 CNAME record for a specified domain. Pass confirm=true to apply; omitting it shows the planned change as a dry run without modifying DNS.

Instructions

Delete the Route 53 CNAME record for a domain. Destructive - requires confirm:true to actually act; without it, returns what would happen and changes nothing. Looks up the exact existing record first rather than guessing its TTL/value.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`domain`	Yes	The domain whose CNAME record should be deleted
`confirm`	No	Must be true to actually delete; false (default) is a dry run

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`message`	Yes
`success`	Yes
`change_id`	No	Route 53 change ID, useful for polling propagation status
`change_status`	No	Route 53 change status, e.g. PENDING or INSYNC

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.1.1Sep 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Explicitly discloses the destructive nature and the confirm:true safety gate, including the dry-run behavior. Adds the lookup-first behavior, which goes beyond the annotations and helps predict side effects.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and each sentence adds a distinct piece of information without waste.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a two-parameter destructive tool, the description plus annotations and output schema cover safety, dry-run, and lookup behavior. Nothing essential is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The description reinforces the confirm parameter's role and explains why no TTL/value parameters exist by noting the tool looks up the existing record. Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but this added context earns a slight upgrade.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: delete the Route 53 CNAME record for a domain. Differentiates from sibling tools like delete_txt_record and delete_cert by specifying the record type and service.

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?

Clearly implies when to use it: to remove a CNAME record from Route 53. Does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the domain/CNAME scope provides sufficient context.

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