Skip to main content
Glama
hostinger

hostinger-api-mcp

Official
by hostinger
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Remote

VPS_activateFirewallV1

Activates a firewall on a virtual machine by assigning a firewall ID, enabling the application of firewall rules to the VPS instance.

Instructions

Activate a firewall for a specified virtual machine.

Only one firewall can be active for a virtual machine at a time.

Use this endpoint to apply firewall rules to VPS instances.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
firewallIdYesFirewall ID
virtualMachineIdYesVirtual Machine ID

Implementation Reference

  • src/core/tools/vps.ts:324-352 (schema)
    Tool schema/registration entry for VPS_activateFirewallV1 - defines the tool as an OpenAPI tool with method POST, path '/api/vps/v1/firewall/{firewallId}/activate/{virtualMachineId}', input schema requiring firewallId and virtualMachineId.
    {
  "name": "VPS_activateFirewallV1",
  "description": "Activate a firewall for a specified virtual machine.\n\nOnly one firewall can be active for a virtual machine at a time.\n\nUse this endpoint to apply firewall rules to VPS instances.",
  "method": "POST",
  "path": "/api/vps/v1/firewall/{firewallId}/activate/{virtualMachineId}",
  "inputSchema": {
    "type": "object",
    "properties": {
      "firewallId": {
        "type": "integer",
        "description": "Firewall ID"
      },
      "virtualMachineId": {
        "type": "integer",
        "description": "Virtual Machine ID"
      }
    },
    "required": [
      "firewallId",
      "virtualMachineId"
    ]
  },
  "security": [
    {
      "apiToken": []
    }
  ],
  "group": "vps"
},

Tool Definition Quality

B3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states the activation action and the singleton constraint, but it fails to clarify whether activating a new firewall automatically deactivates the old one or if manual deactivation is required. This ambiguity could lead to misuse.

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?

The description is three sentences, but the third sentence ('Use this endpoint to apply firewall rules to VPS instances.') is largely redundant with the first sentence. It could be more concise by merging or removing repetition.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return behavior (e.g., success/failure response), the effect on previously active firewalls, or error conditions. The one-active constraint is noted, but other critical context is missing.

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?

The input schema provides clear descriptions for both parameters (firewallId and virtualMachineId) with 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline expectation.

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?

The description clearly states the tool activates a firewall for a virtual machine and includes a key constraint (only one active at a time). It distinguishes from sibling tools like VPS_createNewFirewallV1 and VPS_deactivateFirewallV1, though it does not explicitly differentiate usage.

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?

The description mentions the one-firewall constraint, which is helpful, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., VPS_syncFirewallV1) or prerequisites (e.g., the firewall must already exist).

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/hostinger/api-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server