Skip to main content
Glama
Mogacode-ma

infomaniak-mcp-agent

by Mogacode-ma
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

infomaniak_provision_site_full

Destructive

Provision a complete website with MariaDB database and DNS A record. Uses a two-phase commit for safe, step-by-step execution.

Instructions

Provision a complete website end-to-end: web site + MariaDB database + DNS A record. Two-phase commit at the workflow level. The plan lists every step that will run; on apply, each step is executed and reported in order so you can see partial completion if anything fails mid-way.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hosting_idYesWeb hosting ID where the new site lives. Discover via infomaniak_list_hostings.
fqdnYesFull FQDN of the new site (e.g. 'shop.example.com'). Lowercase, must contain at least one dot and end with a TLD of ≥ 2 chars. NOT just a subdomain label.
database_nameYesMariaDB database to create alongside the site. Alphanumeric + underscores only (no dots / dashes), 1-64 chars. Hosting prefix prepended automatically.
zoneNoParent DNS zone to host the A record. If omitted, derived from fqdn (everything after the first dot). Provide explicitly when the subdomain is multi-level, e.g. fqdn='app.subzone.example.com' but zone='example.com'.
target_ipv4NoIPv4 the A record will point at. Default is Infomaniak's shared apache_php front-end (185.177.62.161). Override if your hosting has a dedicated IP.185.177.62.161
ttlNoTTL of the A record in seconds. 60 to 86400 (24h). Default 3600 (1h).
skip_dnsNoIf true, the DNS step is skipped. Use when DNS is managed elsewhere (Cloudflare, OVH, etc.) and you only want the site + database provisioned.
confirmation_tokenNoToken from the prior plan response. Required on the apply phase only.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changedv0.1.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirmation_token / description
      Added value: +"Token from the prior plan response. Required on the apply phase only."
    • addedInput schema / properties / database_name / description
      Added value: +"MariaDB database to create alongside the site. Alphanumeric + underscores only (no dots / dashes), 1-64 chars. Hosting prefix prepended automatically."
    • addedInput schema / properties / fqdn / description
      Added value: +"Full FQDN of the new site (e.g. 'shop.example.com'). Lowercase, must contain at least one dot and end with a TLD of ≥ 2 chars. NOT just a subdomain label."
    • addedInput schema / properties / hosting_id / description
      Added value: +"Web hosting ID where the new site lives. Discover via infomaniak_list_hostings."
    • addedInput schema / properties / skip_dns / description
      Added value: +"If true, the DNS step is skipped. Use when DNS is managed elsewhere (Cloudflare, OVH, etc.) and you only want the site + database provisioned."
    • addedInput schema / properties / target_ipv4 / description
      Added value: +"IPv4 the A record will point at. Default is Infomaniak's shared apache_php front-end (185.177.62.161). Override if your hosting has a dedicated IP."
    • addedInput schema / properties / ttl / description
      Added value: +"TTL of the A record in seconds. 60 to 86400 (24h). Default 3600 (1h)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / zone / description
      Added value: +"Parent DNS zone to host the A record. If omitted, derived from fqdn (everything after the first dot). Provide explicitly when the subdomain is multi-level, e.g. fqdn='app.subzone.example.com' but zone='example.com'."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint, readOnlyHint, etc.), the description adds crucial workflow behavior: two-phase commit, plan listing every step, sequential ordered execution on apply, and visibility into partial completion on failure. This adds real context without contradicting the structured hints.

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?

Three tightly-scoped sentences: purpose first, workflow next, execution semantics last. No filler or repetition of schema content; every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's multi-resource complexity and 8 parameters, the description covers the high-level workflow and failure visibility, while the rich schema and output schema carry the remaining burden. It could mention that the first call produces the plan and the confirmation_token comes from that plan response, though the schema already states this.

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%, and each parameter already carries detailed semantic documentation (FQDN pattern, zone derivation, TTL bounds, confirmation_token phase). The tool description itself adds no parameter-level detail, matching the baseline for fully-covered schemas.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Provision a complete website end-to-end' and explicitly enumerates the three components (web site, MariaDB database, DNS A record). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like infomaniak_create_site or infomaniak_dns_create_record, which handle only one piece.

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 communicates clear context: this is the composite provisioning tool for a full website, and the two-phase plan/apply workflow explains how the agent should drive it. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when-not-to-use cases, so it stops short of a 5.

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