Proxmox VE MCP server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

A guest in detail

guest_details

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves a Proxmox guest's status, CPU cores, disks, notes, snapshots, last backup coverage, and recent task history for auditing and troubleshooting.

Instructions

One guest: status and use, cores and disks, notes, its snapshots, its last backup and whether a backup job covers it, and its recent tasks from Proxmox's task log (who did what, when).

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": {
      "guest": "<guest>"
    },
    "name": "guest_details"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`guest`	Yes	a name or id, e.g. "erp-db" or "101"

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cores`	No
`disks`	No
`guest`	No
`notes`	No
`problem`	No
`snapshots`	No
`last_backup`	No
`recent_tasks`	No	newest first, from Proxmox's task log
`in_backup_job`	No
`starts_at_boot`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 3, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real value by disclosing that the response aggregates from Proxmox's task log and backup-job configuration, hinting at a broad, possibly heavy payload. It still says nothing about pagination, task-log depth, latency, or failure behavior when a guest has no backups.

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 sentence opening with the resource, then a comma-separated inventory of returned content — no filler. The enumeration is long and its items are not parallel in form, which slightly hurts scanability, but nothing is redundant with the title.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description needn't spell out return shapes, yet it still lists the content categories, which helps tool selection. Against a read-only, single-parameter tool it is close to adequate, but the absence of any routing guidance to sibling detail/list tools leaves a gap an agent must infer.

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 coverage is 100% and the single 'guest' parameter is documented in-schema with a concrete example ('erp-db' or '101'), which already resolves the name-vs-id ambiguity. The description adds no further meaning about the identifier. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the load.

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?

Names the resource (a single guest) and enumerates precisely what is returned: status and use, cores and disks, notes, snapshots, last backup plus backup-job coverage, and recent task-log entries. An agent can tell this is a per-guest detail fetch rather than a search or aggregate, though it never names find_guests or overview to draw the contrast 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: the singular 'one guest' plus the required guest identifier signals this is the drill-down after locating a guest. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer it over find_guests or overview, and no exclusions or prerequisites such as needing to resolve a name first.

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

Deploy Server