Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-1panel-plus

mcp-1panel-plus

by EC061
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Start or Stop Website

operate_website

Start or stop an existing website on a selected 1Panel node to control its lifecycle and availability.

Instructions

Start or stop an existing website (operate: "start" | "stop") on the selected node.

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": {
      "website_id": "<website_id>",
      "operate": "<operate>"
    },
    "name": "operate_website"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nodeIdNoTarget node ID: "local" for the Main Node, or a numeric string ID (e.g. "3") from list_nodes.local
operateYesWebsite lifecycle action: "start" or "stop".
website_idYesNumeric website ID.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the description only needs to add nuance. It contributes that the target must be an existing website and that the action is node-scoped, but says nothing about service interruption while stopped, whether stop is graceful, or whether the operation is reversible.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. The inline enum duplication is mildly redundant against a 100%-covered schema but costs almost nothing.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With three fully documented parameters, no output schema and safety annotations present, the definition is adequate but thin: it does not say what the call returns or how the nodeId default of "local" behaves when omitted.

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 nodeId, operate and website_id. The description repeats the operate enum values verbatim, adding no meaning beyond the structured fields, so the baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb pair (start/stop) and resource (website) scoped to "an existing website", which implicitly separates it from create_website and delete_website. It does not name a sibling explicitly, so it stops short of the top band.

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?

Usage is implied by the start/stop lifecycle framing, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no pointer to alternatives such as create_website for non-existent sites or get_website to check current status.

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