Skip to main content
Glama
AIops-tools

Nutanix AIops

by AIops-tools
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

snapshot_create

Destructive

Create a named VM snapshot using the VM extId for a reversible restore point, with automatic ETag handling. Delete it to undo.

Instructions

[WRITE][risk=medium] Snapshot a VM (reversible → delete the snapshot). Auto-handles ETag.

Args:
    vm_ext_id: VM extId as returned by vm_list.
    name: Name for the new snapshot.
    target: Prism Central target name from config; omit for the default.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
targetNo
vm_ext_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

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, so safety is partially covered; the description adds the key extra fact that the operation is reversible via snapshot_delete. It also discloses the ETag auto-handling behavior, which is real operational context. It does not mention auth/permissions, but the core behavioral traits are surfaced.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loads the write/risk/reversibility facts in one bracketed line, then lists args compactly. Every sentence earns its place; minor redundancy in the 'Args:' block style but no wasted prose.

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?

A write tool with no output schema and no annotation coverage on reversibility: the description supplies the reversibility, the ETag handling, the foreign-key lookup (vm_list), and the target default. Enough to call correctly; only auth/prerequisite detail for a medium-risk write is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: vm_ext_id is cross-referenced to vm_list, target is labeled as a Prism Central config name with an omit-for-default rule. The name param gets the least value (title only), keeping this from a 5.

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 and resource ('Snapshot a VM') and immediately distinguishes itself from siblings by naming the reversal path (snapshot_delete) and lifecycle siblings exist (snapshot_restore). An agent can tell it apart from snapshot_list/restore without opening schemas.

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?

Includes the risk tag [risk=medium] and the reversibility note, which implies when it is safe. But it gives no explicit when-to-use vs snapshot_restore or vm_protect, and no exclusion conditions. Usage is only implied.

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