Skip to main content
Glama
jkmills

Nutanix MCP Server

by jkmills

pe_list_protection_domains

List protection domains on a Prism Element cluster, returning PD names, protected entities, schedules, and replication state.

Instructions

List protection domains on a Prism Element cluster. Returns PD names, protected entities, schedules, and replication state.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pe_hostYesPrism Element CVM IP address or hostname

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function that lists protection domains from a Prism Element cluster via the v2 API.
    async def handle_pe_list_protection_domains(
        client: NutanixClient, arguments: dict[str, Any]
    ) -> dict[str, Any]:
        """List protection domains from Prism Element v2 API."""
        pe_host = arguments["pe_host"]
        result = await client.pe_list(pe_host, "protection_domains")
        entities = result.get("entities", [])
    
        return {
            "count": len(entities),
            "protectionDomains": [
                {
                    "name": pd.get("name"),
                    "active": pd.get("active"),
                    "cronSchedules": pd.get("cron_schedules", []),
                    "replicationLinks": pd.get("replication_links", []),
                    "vmCount": len(pd.get("vms", [])),
                }
                for pd in entities
            ],
        }
  • Tool definition and input schema for pe_list_protection_domains.
    {
        "name": "pe_list_protection_domains",
        "description": (
            "List protection domains on a Prism Element cluster. "
            "Returns PD names, protected entities, schedules, and replication state."
        ),
        "inputSchema": {
            "type": "object",
            "properties": {
                "pe_host": {
                    "type": "string",
                    "description": "Prism Element CVM IP address or hostname",
                },
            },
            "required": ["pe_host"],
        },
    },
    {
        "name": "pe_list_snapshots",
  • Handler dispatch table registering the handler under the tool name.
    PE_HANDLERS: dict[str, Any] = {
        "pe_get_cluster_info": handle_pe_get_cluster_info,
        "pe_list_vms": handle_pe_list_vms,
        "pe_list_hosts": handle_pe_list_hosts,
        "pe_list_containers": handle_pe_list_containers,
        "pe_list_storage_pools": handle_pe_list_storage_pools,
        "pe_list_disks": handle_pe_list_disks,
        "pe_list_alerts": handle_pe_list_alerts,
        "pe_list_protection_domains": handle_pe_list_protection_domains,
        "pe_list_snapshots": handle_pe_list_snapshots,
    }
  • Merged handler dispatch table that includes PE_HANDLERS at the server level.
    ALL_HANDLERS: dict[str, Any] = {
        **VM_HANDLERS,
        **CLUSTER_HANDLERS,
        **PE_HANDLERS,
        **REPORT_HANDLERS,
        **NETWORKING_HANDLERS,
    }
  • Tool registry combining all tool definitions including PE_TOOLS.
    def get_all_tools() -> list[dict]:
        """Return all registered tool definitions."""
        return VM_TOOLS + CLUSTER_TOOLS + PE_TOOLS + REPORT_TOOLS + NETWORKING_TOOLS
Behavior2/5

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention side effects, permissions, or read-only nature. The description is insufficient for transparency.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is concise with one sentence that conveys purpose and output. No unnecessary words.

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?

For a simple list tool with one parameter, the description is adequate but lacks behavioral context and usage guidance, leaving gaps.

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 coverage is 100%, and the parameter description is adequate. The tool description adds no extra semantics beyond the schema, staying at baseline.

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 what the tool does—'List protection domains on a Prism Element cluster'—and specifies the returned data. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, though no direct sibling for protection domains exists.

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 versus alternatives or any prerequisites. The description only states the action without context for appropriate usage.

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/jkmills/nutanix-mcp-server'

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