ncloud-mcp-server

ncloud_gtm_delete_geo_cidr_map

DestructiveIdempotent

Permanently delete a Geo or CIDR map from NCP Global Traffic Manager. Set confirm=true to execute the deletion.

Instructions

⚠️ Destructive: Permanently delete a Geo or CIDR map. 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": {
      "mapId": "<mapId>"
    },
    "name": "ncloud_gtm_delete_geo_cidr_map"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`mapId`	Yes	Map ID to delete
`confirm`	No	Must be true to execute

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.10.1Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, so the description adds value by stating the destruction is permanent and by explicitly disclosing the confirm=true requirement. It does not explain idempotency behavior or consequences on related resources, but the added context is meaningful beyond the annotation.

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 one tightly packed sentence: a warning emoji, a clear destructive statement, and a key operational directive. No redundant phrases or filler; every word earns its place.

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?

Given the simple nature of the delete operation, the schema covers all parameters, annotations cover destructive/idempotent hints, and no output schema exists. The description effectively conveys the essential context: permanence and confirmation. It lacks details on edge cases like non-existent maps, but these are not critical for a one-off delete tool.

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 parameters (mapId and confirm) are fully documented at the schema level. The description's mention of 'Set confirm=true' simply restates the schema's parameter description and does not add new semantic meaning.

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 states the action ('Permanently delete') and the resource ('Geo or CIDR map'), using a specific verb. It is directly distinguishable from sibling tools like create, update, get, and list by the explicit delete operation embedded in the name and description.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description provides context for when to use the tool (when you intend to delete a Geo/CIDR map) and includes a critical usage instruction ('Set confirm=true to execute'). However, it does not mention alternatives or exclusion criteria, such as 'use update to modify instead of delete' or any prerequisites.

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

Deploy Server