pve-mcp

pve_api_search

Search the Proxmox VE API schema by keywords in endpoint paths or descriptions to find relevant endpoints and methods before making requests.

Instructions

Search the PVE API schema by words in the path or description (e.g. "firewall rules", "sdn vnet").

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "pve_api_search"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`query`	Yes
`method`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 10, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

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 does disclose the matching behavior (words matched in path or description), which is useful, but says nothing about result volume, how the 'limit' default of 25 truncates results, or whether the 'method' filter narrows matches — relevant traits for a search tool.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the core action stated first and two illustrative query examples appended. Nothing is wasted, though the examples could have been used to also convey scoping or filtering behavior.

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

Completeness5/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. For a read-only keyword search, the description covers what it searches and roughly how it matches; the only residual gaps are the optional filter and limit parameters, which are secondary to correct invocation since one required param suffices.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% across three parameters. The description only implies what 'query' does; it never explains that 'method' restricts results to a specific HTTP verb (GET/POST/PUT/DELETE) or that 'limit' caps the number of matches returned. With no schema text to fall back on, this gap matters.

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?

The description gives a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('the PVE API schema') plus the matching mechanism ('by words in the path or description'), so an agent knows exactly what the tool returns conceptually. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from pve_api or pve_api_describe, leaving sibling differentiation to inference.

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?

The examples ('firewall rules', 'sdn vnet') imply the intended discovery use case — finding API paths by loose keyword rather than exact path. However, there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over pve_api_describe or pve_api, and no exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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