Porkbun MCP Server

delete_dnssec_record

Delete a DNSSEC record from a domain at the registry by specifying its key tag. This action removes the unwanted DNS security entry for the given domain.

Instructions

Deletes a DNSSEC record associated with the domain at the registry by Key Tag.

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>",
      "keyTag": "<keyTag>"
    },
    "name": "delete_dnssec_record"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`domain`	Yes	The domain name.
`keyTag`	Yes	The Key Tag of the DNSSEC record to delete.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 7, 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 must disclose the tool's behavior. 'Deletes' indicates a destructive action, but it does not mention irreversibility, potential side effects, or what happens if the record does not exist. As a delete tool, this lacks important safety context.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence that clearly conveys the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. Every word is informative.

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 tool has only two well-documented parameters and a straightforward destructive action. The description gives the necessary resource and method, but lacks behavioral details like error handling or irreversible consequences, so it is minimally complete.

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 both 'domain' and 'keyTag' having descriptions. The description reinforces that deletion is 'by Key Tag,' which aligns with the schema but does not add new meaning beyond it. 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 uses a specific verb ('Deletes') and clearly identifies the resource ('DNSSEC record') and method ('by Key Tag'). It distinguishes from sibling 'delete_dns_record' by specifying DNSSEC at the registry level.

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?

The description implies the tool is for DNSSEC records specifically, and 'at the registry' provides context, but it does not explicitly state when to use this versus other delete tools or when not to use it. No alternatives are named.

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