Skip to main content
Glama
hostkey-cloud

hostkey-mcp-server

Official
by hostkey-cloud
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

add_static_nat

Create a static DNAT mapping to a server's IPMI, exposing a public IP for classic IPMI access; provide ip_acl when required and track the async task with check_task.

Instructions

Create a static DNAT to the server IPMI (nat/add_static_nat): public IP for classic IPMI access. Distinct from Secure IPMI Proxy in the panel — Proxy Active alone may not satisfy this call. Async; track with check_task. On server_ipmi_acl_required pass ip_acl.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesServer ID
ttlNoNAT lifetime in seconds, if supported
ip_aclNoClient IP(s) allowed to reach IPMI via NAT (InvAPI ip_acl). Required by some accounts when panel Proxy ACL is not enough.
confirmYesMust be true to run the operation.
securedNoSecured NAT flag if supported by InvAPI

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.0.8
    • addedInput schema / properties / ip_acl
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Client IP(s) allowed to reach IPMI via NAT (InvAPI ip_acl). Required by some accounts when panel Proxy ACL is not enough.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / secured
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "integer"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "Secured NAT flag if supported by InvAPI"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / ttl
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "NAT lifetime in seconds, if supported",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.3
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"ID сервера"New value: +"Server ID"
  3. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare that this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, open-world operation. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: the call is asynchronous and should be tracked with `check_task`, and `ip_acl` may be required by some accounts. It does not describe duplicate-NAT behavior, permissions, or side effects in detail, but the annotation coverage lowers the burden.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core action and resource, then adds only operationally relevant clauses: endpoint, distinction from Secure IPMI Proxy, async tracking, and ACL handling. There is no filler, and each clause contributes to correct tool selection or invocation.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it creates, why it is needed versus proxy access, that it is asynchronous, how to track it via `check_task`, and when to supply `ip_acl`. The remaining parameter details are fully covered by the schema and annotations.

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 coverage is 100%, so all five parameters are already documented, establishing a baseline of 3. The description adds meaningful conditional semantics for `ip_acl` by saying to pass it when `server_ipmi_acl_required` occurs, which goes beyond the schema's generic parameter description.

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 states a specific verb and resource: create a static DNAT for server IPMI, with the underlying endpoint `nat/add_static_nat`. It also clarifies the use case as public IP for classic IPMI access and distinguishes it from the Secure IPMI Proxy feature, so an agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives a clear usage condition: it is for classic IPMI access via public IP, and Proxy Active alone may not satisfy the call. It also tells the caller to pass `ip_acl` when `server_ipmi_acl_required` occurs. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives such as `clear_static_nat`, `remove_static_nat`, or `drop_nat`, so it falls short of full when/when-not/alternative 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