boxes-mcp

by EF-Code

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Local

boxes.suspend

Pause a running virtual machine by providing its domain name or UUID, freezing its current state for later resumption.

Instructions

Suspend a running domain

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": {
      "nameOrUuid": "<nameOrUuid>"
    },
    "name": "boxes.suspend"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`nameOrUuid`	Yes	Domain name or UUID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0Aug 22, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states only that the tool suspends a running domain but does not explain effects (e.g., state preservation, reversibility via 'resume', or resource implications). This is a significant transparency gap for a state-changing operation.

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?

The description is a single, unambiguous sentence with no fluff, and the action is front-loaded. It is appropriately concise for a simple operation, though it borders on under-specification, which is captured in other dimensions.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to mention when to use suspend, what happens to the domain, or any side effects. An agent would lack essential context to decide between suspend and shutdown, making the tool risky to invoke without further research.

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?

The input schema already documents the sole parameter as 'Domain name or UUID' with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter, such as format requirements or how it relates to the operation, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'suspend' and the resource 'domain', which distinguishes it from sibling operations like 'start', 'shutdown', 'reboot', and 'resume'. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, so it stops short of the strongest clarity score.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use 'suspend' versus other lifecycle operations such as 'shutdown' or 'reboot'. It also fails to mention prerequisites like the domain needing to be in a running state, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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