Unofficial-Proxmox-MCP

pve_list_systems

List virtual machines and LXC containers across a Proxmox VE cluster, with optional filters for node, system type, and running or stopped status.

Instructions

List virtual machines and LXC containers in the cluster.

Args: node: Filter by specific node name (e.g. 'pve') or 'all' across cluster. type_filter: 'all', 'qemu' (VMs only), or 'lxc' (Containers only). status_filter: 'all', 'running', or 'stopped'.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "pve_list_systems"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`node`	No	all
`type_filter`	No	all
`status_filter`	No	all

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the burden. 'List' signals a read-only operation, and the note that 'all' spans the cluster discloses cross-cluster scope, which is useful. It still says nothing about permissions, result size/pagination, or default behavior when filters are omitted beyond the schema defaults.

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?

One front-loaded purpose sentence followed by a compact Args block — no filler. The structure is scannable and every line earns its place, though the Args prose is somewhat redundant with the schema's parameter names.

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?

For a three-parameter, zero-required listing tool with an output schema present, the definition covers purpose and all parameter values adequately. Remaining gaps (pagination, permission requirements, filter interaction) are modest given the output schema handles return shape.

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% and no enums are declared, so the description must compensate — and it largely does, spelling out the accepted values for all three parameters ('all'/'qemu'/'lxc', 'all'/'running'/'stopped', node name or 'all') and giving a concrete node example. It does not explain how the filters combine or whether node='all' is required for type/status filtering to span the cluster.

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 and resource: 'List virtual machines and LXC containers in the cluster.' The agent can tell it apart from pve_list_nodes or pve_list_backups by the resource named, though the description never explicitly contrasts itself with those siblings.

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 filter arguments (node scope, VM vs container, running vs stopped) rather than stated. There is no explicit 'use this when...' guidance and no pointer to pve_get_system for per-system detail or to pve_list_nodes for node-level listing.

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