Retrieve the list of all nodes in your Proxmox cluster to monitor and manage physical hosts.
List all nodes in the Proxmox cluster
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": "list_nodes"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds no behavioral context beyond 'list'. It does not mention pagination, ordering, or side effects. Adequate given annotations but no extra value.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence, perfectly concise. Front-loaded with verb and resource. No wasted words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no output schema, the description could be more complete by hinting at return format (e.g., 'returns node names and status'). As is, it is adequate but minimal for a list operation with no parameters.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100%. Baseline is 4 for zero-param tools. Description does not need to add parameter info. The tool is straightforward.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'nodes in the Proxmox cluster'. It distinguishes from sibling list tools (e.g., list_vms, list_storage) by specifying 'cluster' context. However, it lacks detail like what information about nodes is returned.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many list tools, explicit context (e.g., 'For cluster-level infrastructure') would help. The description assumes the agent knows to select this for cluster nodes.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.