de en es ja ko ru zh

proxmox-safe-mcp

Name: proxmox-safe-mcp
Author: bgauger

by bgauger

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

Proxmox Safe MCP

Un servidor MCP de Proxmox centrado que expone lecturas limitadas de inventario/estado y solo dos clases estrechas de mutación: acciones de energía de invitados en lista blanca y creación de instantáneas. Extraído del commit 2e63f009d8f4642e17398685baef0251811d6637 de spectrenet-mcp; este repositorio es autónomo.

Alfa: las pruebas son sintéticas. La compatibilidad con la API de Proxmox no ha sido certificada contra todas las versiones; pruebe en infraestructura que no sea de producción.

Contrato de seguridad

Los nodos están explícitamente en la lista blanca para operaciones dirigidas a nodos (node_status) y ambas herramientas de mutación; los tipos de invitados son solo qemu y lxc; los VMID deben ser enteros positivos.
cluster_status y list_guests devuelven intencionalmente vistas de API de todo el clúster y no se filtran por la lista blanca de nodos. Limite la cuenta/token de API de Proxmox dedicada para restringir lo que estas herramientas de lectura pueden ver.
Las acciones de energía son solo start, shutdown, reboot y stop.
Los nombres de instantáneas son de 1 a 64 letras ASCII, dígitos, _ o -.
Cada mutación requiere confirmación byte a byte de APPROVE <action> <target>.
Las respuestas de mutación son recibos de envío, no prueba de finalización. Verifique el UPID devuelto y el estado final por separado.
No hay herramientas de eliminación de invitados/instantáneas, energía del host, mutación de almacenamiento, asignación, migración o configuración. node_status excluye deliberadamente la enumeración de almacenamiento.
Las respuestas/listas/campos de auditoría están limitados y la verificación TLS está activada por defecto.

Related MCP server: Proximo

Instalar y ejecutar

uv sync --extra test
uv run proxmox-safe-mcp --help
uv run proxmox-safe-mcp

El servidor utiliza MCP stdio. No carga .env; use .env.example solo como documentación falsa e inyecte secretos a través de un supervisor o administrador de secretos.

Verificar

uv sync --locked --extra test
uv run --locked pytest
uv run --locked python -m compileall -q src tests
uv build

Available Tools

5 tools

cluster_statusD

Name	Required	Description	Default
No parameters

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
No output parameters

TDQS

D1/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

Tool has no description.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness1/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Tool has no description.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Tool has no description.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Tool has no description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose1/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Tool has no description.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

Tool has no description.

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

guest_powerD

Name	Required	Description	Default
`node`	Yes
`vmid`	Yes
`action`	Yes
`confirm`	No
`guest_type`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
No output parameters

TDQS

D1/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

Tool has no description.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness1/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Tool has no description.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Tool has no description.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Tool has no description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose1/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Tool has no description.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

Tool has no description.

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

list_guestsD

Name	Required	Description	Default
No parameters

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`result`	Yes

TDQS

D1/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

Tool has no description.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness1/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Tool has no description.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Tool has no description.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Tool has no description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose1/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Tool has no description.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

Tool has no description.

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

node_statusD

Name	Required	Description	Default
`node`	Yes

TDQS

D1/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

Tool has no description.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness1/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Tool has no description.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Tool has no description.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Tool has no description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose1/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Tool has no description.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

Tool has no description.

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

snapshot_guestD

Name	Required	Description	Default
`node`	Yes
`vmid`	Yes
`confirm`	No
`guest_type`	Yes
`snapshot_name`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
No output parameters

TDQS

D1/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

Tool has no description.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness1/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Tool has no description.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Tool has no description.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Tool has no description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose1/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Tool has no description.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

Tool has no description.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

5 tool updatesv0.1.0Aug 25, 2026
- First observedcluster_status
- First observedguest_power
- First observedlist_guests
- First observednode_status
- First observedsnapshot_guest

Deploy Server

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

TDQS

D1.9/5.0

Scored 2026-08-25 01:35 across 5 tools

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct aspect of the Proxmox environment: cluster status, node status, guest listing, guest power control, and guest snapshotting. There is no overlap in purposes, making selection unambiguous.

Naming Consistency3/5

The names mix noun-initial patterns (cluster_status, node_status, guest_power) with verb-initial patterns (list_guests, snapshot_guest). This inconsistency is noticeable but still readable and predictable overall.

Tool Count5/5

With only 5 tools, the server is tightly scoped and each tool serves a clear purpose. This is well-balanced for a specialized MCP server focused on monitoring and safe guest operations.

Completeness3/5

The set covers status, listing, power, and snapshot operations but lacks lifecycle management (create, update, delete guests). While potentially intentional for a 'safe' server, it leaves notable gaps for full Proxmox administration.

Maintenance

ActivityStale

ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

emisar
dev.emisar
Let AI operate servers without SSH. Choose actions, approve risky changes, and audit every step.
Cloud Platforms Security Networking & Infrastructure
2331
https://emisar.dev/api/mcp/rpc
Hermes Plant — Agent Commerce Assurance A
io.github.JesseGdotIO
Preflight, approve, and prove consequential agent actions with signed evidence and x402 tools.
Finance AI & Machine Learning
2522
https://mcp.hermesplant.com/mcp
Bastrio
io.bastr
Manage remote servers, SSH terminals, files, databases and proxies with scoped access and approvals.
Networking & Infrastructure Shell Access Security
1
https://bastr.io/api/mcp
penholder
ai.penholder
Preventive human-approval write-gate for AI agents: writes commit only after a human approves.
Security Autonomous Agents Agent Orchestration
1
https://api.penholder.ai/mcp

Related MCP Servers

ProxmoxMCP-Plus
Virtualization Monitoring
rodaddy
A
license
Not graded
quality
C
maintenance
Enables comprehensive management of Proxmox virtualization environments, including VM and container lifecycle, snapshots, backups, monitoring, and OpenAPI integration.
Updated 2 months ago (2026-08-23 00:22 UTC)
12
MIT
Proximo
App Automation Shell Access Virtualization
john-broadway
A
license
A
quality
A
maintenance
Enables management of Proxmox VE infrastructure via its REST API and execution of commands inside LXC containers via SSH, with built-in trust layers for planning, audit, undo, and diagnosis.
Updated 4 days ago (2026-11-01 19:32 UTC)
6
740 PyPI
64
AGPL 3.0
proxmox-mcp
Virtualization Shell Access Command Line
ssan9876
F
license
A
quality
D
maintenance
Enables an AI assistant to fully navigate a single-node Proxmox VE host over SSH, with modes for read-only inspection, safe operations, and full control including provisioning and destruction.
Updated 3 months ago (2026-08-06 04:05 UTC)
34
-
Proxmox MCP Server
Virtualization Cloud Platforms Networking & Infrastructure
thanhan92-f1
A
license
Not graded
quality
A
maintenance
Exposes 338 tools for the Proxmox Virtual Environment API, enabling users to inspect and control nodes, QEMU VMs, LXC containers, storage and backups, clustering and HA, users and permissions, firewall rules, disks, Ceph, ACME certificates, SDN, notifications, and resource pools. Includes lifecycle actions, snapshots, migration, metrics, task tracking, and guest-agent command execution, with an optional read-only mode that blocks all writes.
Updated 24 days ago (2026-10-13 03:24 UTC)
MIT