Delete a dead host by its ID to remove unused or failed Nginx Proxy Manager hosts. Provide host_id to clean up dead host entries.
Delete a dead host by ID
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| host_id | Yes | The ID of the dead host to delete |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state that the operation is irreversible, whether the host must be disabled first, what permissions are required, or what is returned/removed — all critical for a destructive tool with zero structured coverage.
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?
One short, front-loaded sentence with zero filler, which is efficient. However, the extreme brevity comes at the cost of the behavioral warnings a destructive operation would need, so it is tight rather than well-rounded.
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?
For a destructive, irreversible delete with no annotations and no output schema, the definition omits the safety context an agent needs: permanence of the action, preconditions, failure modes, and whether related configuration is removed. The schema covers the parameter, but the behavioral surface is essentially undocumented.
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% and there is a single required parameter documented in the schema as 'The ID of the dead host to delete'. The description only restates 'by ID', adding no format, type, or sourcing guidance beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.
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?
The description states a specific verb and resource ('Delete a dead host') plus the lookup key (by ID), which is unambiguous. It implicitly distinguishes itself from enable/disable/update dead-host siblings, but never names them or states the distinction.
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?
There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites (e.g. the host must already be disabled or not in use), and no contrast with alternatives such as npm_disable_dead_host or npm_update_dead_host. The agent must infer the entire usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.