Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ncloud-gov-mcp-server

ncloud-gov-mcp-server

by sjk4425
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

ncloud_delete_subnet

DestructiveIdempotent

Permanently delete a subnet using its subnet number. Set confirm=true to execute the destructive operation.

Instructions

⚠️ Destructive: Permanently delete a subnet. Set confirm=true to execute.

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": {
      "subnetNo": "<subnetNo>"
    },
    "name": "ncloud_delete_subnet"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmNoMust be true to actually execute the destructive operation
subnetNoYesSubnet number to delete

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Discloses destructive behavior via warning icon and 'Permanently delete', and discloses the confirm guard. This goes beyond annotations by explaining the safety mechanism. No contradiction with idempotentHint/destructiveHint.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with a warning, no filler words. Each clause adds essential information (action+permanence, execution condition).

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple delete tool with full schema coverage and annotations, the description is adequate: it states action, permanence, and execution condition. It omits potential prerequisites like disassociating dependencies, but this is not critical for basic usage.

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 already fully describes both parameters (subnetNo and confirm), including confirm's necessity. The description reinforces 'confirm=true' but adds no extra semantics beyond the schema.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly identifies the action (delete) and resource (subnet) with the specific verb 'delete' and object 'subnet', distinguishing it from sibling create/list/get tools. The word 'Permanently' reinforces the action's completeness.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

States that confirm=true is required to execute, giving a clear usage condition. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or provide alternatives, though the tool's purpose is unambiguous.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools