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

ncloud-mcp-server

by sjk4425
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

ncloud_ncr_delete_registry

DestructiveIdempotent

Permanently delete a container registry from Naver Cloud Platform. Set confirm=true to execute this destructive operation.

Instructions

⚠️ Destructive: Permanently delete a container registry (DELETE /repositories/{registry}, 204 on success). 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": {
      "registryName": "<registryName>"
    },
    "name": "ncloud_ncr_delete_registry"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmNoMust be true to actually execute the destructive operation
registryNameYesName of the registry to delete

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.10.1

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description adds permanence, a required confirm gate, and the 204 success code. It stops short of describing permissions or downstream effects on contained images, but adds meaningful context beyond annotations.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero waste. The warning, action, endpoint, success code, and required parameter are all stated efficiently.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a two-parameter destructive tool with no output schema and annotations covering safety traits, the description supplies enough to invoke correctly: destructive warning, endpoint, success behavior, and the confirm requirement. Missing alternative guidance is minor and captured under usage guidelines.

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 schema already documents both parameters fully. The description repeats the confirm=true requirement but adds no syntax, format, or other meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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?

States a specific verb (delete), resource (container registry), endpoint, and success code. Distinguishes from sibling delete_image/delete_tag tools by naming the registry as the object being deleted.

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?

Provides an execution prerequisite (confirm=true) and a destructive warning, but does not compare against alternatives such as deleting images/tags or using other registry-management tools. Usage is implied by the destructive delete nature, but explicit when-to-use guidance is absent.

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