mcp-server-cloudflare

cf_zones

List and manage Cloudflare zones (domains) to configure DNS, security, and performance settings for your websites and applications.

Instructions

List Cloudflare zones (domains)

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "cf_zones"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`page`	No	Page number
`perPage`	No	Per page

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 the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states this is a listing operation, implying it's read-only and non-destructive, but doesn't mention authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior beyond the schema, or what the output looks like. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 that directly states the tool's purpose without any unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to understand at a glance.

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 the complexity of listing Cloudflare zones, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what information is returned, how zones are filtered or sorted, or any operational constraints. For a tool with no structured output documentation, more descriptive context is needed.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, with both parameters ('page' and 'perPage') fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's in the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage without compensating value.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('Cloudflare zones (domains)'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'cf_dns_list' or 'cf_workers_list' that also list resources, missing full sibling distinction.

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 when to use 'cf_zones' instead of other listing tools like 'cf_dns_list' or 'cf_workers_list', nor does it specify any prerequisites or context for usage.

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

Deploy Server