Skip to main content
Glama
CyberKnightLabs

vmware-knight

by CyberKnightLabs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

set_vmk_service

Idempotent

Enable or disable a vSphere service on a VMkernel adapter with preview-first confirmation to avoid unintended changes.

Instructions

[WRITE] Enable/disable a host service on an existing vmk - preview/confirm gated.

Completes the add_host_vmk story: adapters are created serviceless by design, then tagged here (e.g. enable "vmotion" on a new vMotion vmk). Idempotent - re-applying the current state returns a no-write noop. Verify with list_host_vmks (the services field). Audited.

Valid services are the vSphere nicType names: management, vmotion, vsan, vSphereProvisioning, faultToleranceLogging, vSphereReplication, vSphereReplicationNFC, vSphereBackupNFC, ptp, and the nvme/vsan variants. Note "vSphereProvisioning", not "provisioning".

FAIL CLOSED: refuses both directions when the host's service map cannot be read. ABSOLUTE, no override: disabling management on the host's only management-enabled vmk - the call rides the interface it would untag.

Returns: Preview dict (action="preview"), noop dict (action="noop") when the state already matches, or result dict (action="set", services_now). Errors return a dict with "error" + hint.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
vmkYesDevice name to change (e.g. "vmk3").
targetNovCenter target name from config.yaml; omit to use the default target.
confirmNoFalse (default) returns the blast radius and changes nothing. True applies it. Do not set True because the user asked earlier; they have not seen the preview yet.
enabledYesTrue selects the vmk for the service; False deselects.
serviceYesService/nicType name to enable or disable.
host_nameYesESXi host the vmk lives on.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.12.10

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses preview/confirm gating, idempotent no-write noop behavior, audit logging, fail-closed behavior when the service map cannot be read, and the absolute safeguard against disabling management on the only management-enabled vmk. This is substantial non-obvious behavioral context.

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 longer than average but every sentence earns its place: it front-loads the operation and gating model, organizes safety behaviors clearly, and ends with a concise return-value breakdown. There is no filler or repeated boilerplate.

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?

Given the tool's complexity and the absence of an output schema, the description is unusually complete. It covers valid inputs, preview/confirm behavior, idempotency, failure modes, safety guards, and the exact shapes of all return dicts. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Even though schema coverage is 100%, the description adds real value for parameters: it enumerates valid nicType service names, warns about the exact 'vSphereProvisioning' spelling, and clarifies confirm semantics, including the instruction not to set confirm=true before the user has seen the preview. This goes well beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 opens with '[WRITE] Enable/disable a host service on an existing vmk - preview/confirm gated,' naming a specific verb, resource, and operation mode. It also distinguishes itself from add_host_vmk by explaining that adapters are created serviceless and then tagged by this tool.

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?

The description gives clear usage context: it completes the add_host_vmk story and tells the agent to verify results with list_host_vmks. It does not explicitly list when-not-to-use conditions or contrast with every sibling, but the context is sufficiently clear for an agent to select it appropriately.

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