Unofficial-Proxmox-MCP

pve_get_system

Retrieve detailed hardware configuration, network adapters, memory, disk layouts, and live status for a Proxmox VM or LXC container; optionally locate it automatically across cluster nodes.

Instructions

Get detailed hardware configuration, network adapters, memory, disk layouts, and live status for a VM or LXC container.

Args: vmid: Target VM or LXC Container ID (e.g. 101 or 204). node: Optional node name. If omitted, automatically locates the system across cluster nodes.

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": {
      "vmid": "<vmid>"
    },
    "name": "pve_get_system"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`node`	No
`vmid`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that node lookup is automatic across cluster nodes when omitted, and that it returns live status as well as static config, but it says nothing about permissions, cost/latency on a live query, or what happens if the vmid does not exist.

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?

Two sentences plus a compact Args block, with the capability statement front-loaded ahead of the parameter notes. Nothing extraneous; the enumerated resource types are purposeful because they tell the agent what data to expect.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail is unnecessary, and both parameters are explained. For a simple two-parameter read tool this is close to complete, with only error and permission behavior left unstated.

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 largely does: vmid is described as the target VM or LXC container ID with example values (101 or 204), and node is described as optional with an explained auto-locate fallback, which clarifies the schema's odd empty-string default.

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 ('Get') and resource granularity ('detailed hardware configuration, network adapters, memory, disk layouts, and live status') scoped to 'a VM or LXC container'. This distinguishes it implicitly from list-style siblings like pve_list_systems, but it never names or contrasts any alternative explicitly.

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 only implied: you call it when you have a vmid and need detail on one guest. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer it over pve_list_systems or the more specialised pve_get_guest_network / pve_get_node_status, and no preconditions or exclusions are given.

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