Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
portainer-mcp

portainer-mcp

by ginkida
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

portainer_network_disconnect

Disconnect a container from a network in Portainer. Provide network ID, container ID, and optionally force the disconnection.

Instructions

Disconnect a container from a network.

Args: network_id: Network ID or name container_id: Container ID or name force: Force disconnect (default false) endpoint_id: Target endpoint ID (uses default if omitted)

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": {
      "network_id": "<network_id>",
      "container_id": "<container_id>"
    },
    "name": "portainer_network_disconnect"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
forceNo
network_idYes
endpoint_idNo
container_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits, but it only states the action and parameters. Missing side effects (e.g., container loses connectivity) or prerequisites.

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?

Extremely concise and well-structured: one-line purpose followed by a clear parameter list. Every sentence is warranted.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Adequate for a simple action with four parameters and output schema present, but lacks behavioral context and edge cases (e.g., container not connected).

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by briefly explaining each parameter (e.g., 'Network ID or name', 'force disconnect (default false)').

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 clearly states the action 'Disconnect a container from a network', which is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like portainer_network_connect.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use or when not to use, but the purpose is clear enough for an agent to infer usage context. Lacks exclusions or alternatives.

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