mcp-server-cloudflare

cf_dns_create

Create DNS records in Cloudflare by specifying zone ID, record type, name, and content to manage domain resolution.

Instructions

Create a 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": {
      "zoneId": "<zoneId>",
      "type": "<type>",
      "name": "<name>",
      "content": "<content>"
    },
    "name": "cf_dns_create"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`zoneId`	Yes	Zone ID
`type`	Yes	Record type (A, AAAA, CNAME, TXT, MX, etc.)
`name`	Yes	Record name (e.g. 'www' or '@')
`content`	Yes	Record content (IP, hostname, text)
`ttl`	No	TTL (1 = auto)
`proxied`	No	Proxied through Cloudflare

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.1Mar 10, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Create a DNS record' implies a write operation but lacks details on permissions required, rate limits, whether the operation is idempotent, what happens on conflicts, or what the response contains. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly. Every word earns its place by conveying essential information without redundancy.

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 this is a mutation tool (creating DNS records) with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like error handling, authentication needs, or response format. For a tool with 6 parameters and critical write operations, more context is needed to ensure safe and effective use.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all 6 parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema (e.g., no examples of valid 'type' values beyond those implied, no clarification on 'ttl=1' meaning 'auto'). Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Create') and resource ('a DNS record'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like cf_dns_delete and cf_dns_list by specifying creation rather than deletion or listing. However, it doesn't explicitly mention Cloudflare context or differentiate from other DNS-related tools beyond the name prefix.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (like needing a zoneId from cf_zones), when not to use it (e.g., for updates vs. creation), or how it differs from other DNS operations. Sibling tools like cf_dns_delete and cf_dns_list exist, but no comparison is offered.

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

Deploy Server