Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Proxmox MCP Server

Proxmox MCP Server

by fredriksknese
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

resize_vm_disk

Resize a virtual machine disk on a Proxmox node by specifying the VM ID, disk identifier (e.g., scsi0), and new size or increment (e.g., +10G).

Instructions

Resize a VM disk

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": {
      "node": "<node>",
      "vmid": "<vmid>",
      "disk": "<disk>",
      "size": "<size>"
    },
    "name": "resize_vm_disk"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
diskYesThe disk to resize (e.g. scsi0, virtio0)
nodeYesThe node name
sizeYesNew size or size increment (e.g. "+10G")
vmidYesThe VM ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=false. Description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotation, such as whether resizing can increase or decrease size, or if it requires a shutdown.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Single sentence is concise but lacks structure. No front-loading of key information beyond the minimal description.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With no output schema and many sibling tools, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values or when to choose this over update_vm_config, leaving the agent underinformed.

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?

Input schema has 100% parameter descriptions, so baseline is 3. Description does not add extra meaning to parameters beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states the action (resize) and resource (VM disk), distinguishing it from generic sibling tools like update_vm_config. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from similar disk-related operations.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as update_vm_config. No prerequisites or constraints mentioned (e.g., VM must be stopped, disk must exist).

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