delete_forwardPermanently removes an HTTP forward for a specified domain and host, helping clean up redirects that are no longer needed. This action cannot be undone.
Delete an HTTP forward. This cannot be undone.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| host | Yes | the host/subdomain whose forward should be deleted | |
| domain_id | Yes | the Domeneshop domain ID, from list_domains |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. 'This cannot be undone' merely restates the destructive hint and adds no new context like auth requirements, side effects on related records, or confirmation behavior.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the key constraint. No padding or redundant explanation.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the simple two-parameter delete operation, rich schema descriptions, and thorough annotations, the description is nearly complete. It confirms the purpose and irreversibility, though it omits guidance about related tools that an agent might consider first.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides; baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb and resource ('Delete an HTTP forward'), and the resource is clearly distinct from sibling tools such as delete_dns_record or delete_dyndns. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternatives are given. The name and purpose imply deletion, but the description does not distinguish this from other delete tools or state prerequisites such as owning the domain.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.