Skip to main content
Glama
gensecaihq

pfSense MCP Server

by gensecaihq
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

delete_interface

Destructive

Remove a pfSense interface by its ID after confirmation. Preview changes with dry-run mode to avoid irreversible deletions.

Instructions

Delete (unassign) an interface by ID. WARNING: This is irreversible.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmNoMust be set to True to execute. Safety gate for destructive operations.
dry_runNoIf True, preview the operation without executing.
interface_idYesInterface ID, which the API keys by name: "wan", "lan", or "optN" (e.g. "opt16"). Take it from the "id" field returned by search_interface_configs, not from the row's position.
apply_immediatelyNoWhether to apply changes immediately

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.1.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / interface_id / description
      Previous value: -"Interface ID (from search_interface_configs)"New value: +"Interface ID, which the API keys by name: \"wan\", \"lan\",\nor \"optN\" (e.g. \"opt16\"). Take it from the \"id\" field returned by\nsearch_interface_configs, not from the row's position."
    • changedInput schema / properties / interface_id / type
      Previous value: -"integer"New value: +"string"
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description adds value by explicitly warning 'This is irreversible.' This clarifies the severity beyond a generic 'destructive' flag. It also adds the 'unassign' nuance, which indicates the operation removes an assignment rather than physically deleting hardware.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two short sentences with zero waste. The core action is front-loaded ('Delete (unassign)') and the critical warning ('irreversible') is placed immediately after. Every word earns its place.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The description is brief but sufficient given the comprehensive schema (100% coverage) and strong annotations. It conveys the essential behavior, irreversibility, and the ID requirement. Minor gaps like the confirm safety gate and dry_run are already documented in the schema, so the description doesn't need to repeat them.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description's only param-related hint is 'by ID', which aligns with the interface_id parameter but adds no new detail beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Delete'), resource ('interface'), and clarifies the action with 'unassign' in parentheses蓬莱山輝夜. It clearly distinguishes from other deletion tools by specifying 'interface by ID' and the 'unassign' nuance, which is not obvious from the name alone.

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 when-to-use guidance is provided. It does not mention alternatives (e.g., delete_interface_bridge, delete_vlan) or conditions under which this tool should be preferred. The only scoping information is 'by ID', but that is not usage guidance.

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