domain-suite-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

create_dns_record

Add a new DNS record for your domain with required fields: domain, record type, name, and content. Optionally set TTL and priority for supported record types.

Instructions

Create a new 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": {
      "domain": "<domain>",
      "type": "<type>",
      "name": "<name>",
      "content": "<content>"
    },
    "name": "create_dns_record"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`domain`	Yes
`provider`	No
`type`	Yes
`name`	Yes	Subdomain or '@' for root
`content`	Yes	IP address, hostname, or TXT value
`ttl`	No	TTL in seconds; use 1 for Cloudflare Auto
`priority`	No	Required for MX and SRV records

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Mar 12, 2026

TDQS

C2.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Create a new DNS record' but does not mention idempotency, error handling, or side effects (e.g., whether existing records with the same name are replaced or duplicated).

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single short sentence, which is concise but too vague. It does not earn its place by providing meaningful guidance; it merely restates the tool's name.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with 7 parameters and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It omits essential context such as required record types, the meaning of 'content', or how the 'provider' parameter is used. This leaves the agent underinformed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool description adds no parameter-level information. The input schema has 57% coverage, but the description does not clarify missing parameter descriptions (e.g., domain, provider). It relies solely on the schema, which is insufficient.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description conveys the basic action of creating a DNS record, which is a clear verb+resource. However, it lacks specificity to distinguish from siblings like update_dns_record or delete_dns_record.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., update_dns_record for modifications, or setup_spf for specific record types). The description simply states the action without context.

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