Skip to main content
Glama
cacack

vyos-mcp

by cacack
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

vyos_validate

Validate VyOS configuration syntax by temporarily applying commands in a 1-minute commit-confirm window that auto-rolls back; successful responses mean syntax is valid.

Instructions

Validate VyOS configuration syntax without persisting changes.

Applies commands with a 1-minute commit-confirm window and does NOT
confirm, so the router automatically rolls back. This is not a true
dry-run — the configuration is temporarily applied for up to 1 minute.

A successful response means the syntax is valid. An HTTP error means the
commands contain invalid syntax or paths — unless it says the changes were
COMMITTED, in which case they persist and must be reviewed.

Args:
    commands: List of config operations, each with 'op'
        ('set'/'delete') and 'path' (list of strings).
        Example: [{"op": "set", "path": ["firewall",
        "group", "network-group", "MY_GROUP"]}]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
commandsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so: it discloses the 1-minute commit-confirm window, automatic rollback, the fact that config is temporarily applied, and the success/error/COMMITTED response semantics including the dangerous case where changes persist. This is unusually thorough for a mutation-adjacent 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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose and the non-dry-run caveat, then response semantics, then the Args block. Every sentence is load-bearing, though the docstring-style Args section is slightly more verbose than needed given the example alone would suffice.

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?

No output schema and no annotations exist, so the description must explain both behavior and return interpretation — it does both, covering rollback timing, success meaning, error meaning, and the COMMITTED exception. Nothing an agent needs to call this safely is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0% and the item object is opaque (additionalProperties: true), so the description must compensate — and it does, naming the 'op' ('set'/'delete') and 'path' (list of strings) keys and giving a concrete example payload. No ambiguity remains about how to build the commands list.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ('Validate VyOS configuration syntax') and immediately scopes it with 'without persisting changes,' which is exactly what distinguishes it from vyos_configure. An agent can tell what this does and roughly where it sits relative to siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description makes the usage context clear (validate before committing, with auto-rollback) and warns it is 'not a true dry-run,' which is decision-relevant. It never explicitly says 'use this instead of vyos_configure' or names a sibling, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools