ncp-mcp-server

delete_load_balancer

Deletes a load balancer from Naver Cloud Platform using its instance number.

Instructions

로드 밸런서를 삭제합니다

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": {
      "loadBalancerInstanceNo": "<loadBalancerInstanceNo>"
    },
    "name": "delete_load_balancer"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`loadBalancerInstanceNo`	Yes	로드 밸런서 인스턴스 번호

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 5, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It fails to mention that deletion is permanent, irreversible, or may impact associated resources. This is a significant gap for a destructive operation.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is concise (a single sentence) but adds little value beyond restating the tool name. It is not verbose, but the sentence does not earn its place by providing additional information.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is still incomplete for a delete operation. It omits important context such as effect on associated resources, irreversibility, or expected response behavior, which is crucial for an agent to use it correctly.

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 covers the only parameter ('Load balancer instance number') with 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning; it does not elaborate on how the parameter is used or any constraints.

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 ('Deletes the load balancer') with a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, but the action is unambiguous and aligns with the tool name.

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, prerequisites, or exclusions. The description simply states the action without any context about appropriate usage scenarios.

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