Skip to main content
Glama

pbs_node_disk_wipe

Wipe all data and partition table from a PBS disk or partition for secure erasure. Dry-run returns a plan; confirm to execute irreversibly.

Instructions

MUTATION: wipe ALL data and the partition table on a PBS disk or partition.

RISK_HIGH, NO UNDO: DESTROYS all data, partitions, and filesystems on the named device — more destructive than pbs_node_disk_initgpt, which only overwrites the partition table. Unlike initgpt, 'disk' here MAY be a partition, not just a whole disk. Dry-run by default (returns a PLAN); confirm=True executes (PUT /nodes/{node}/disks/wipedisk, Smoke-confirm) and returns {"status": "submitted", "result": <task UPID | None>}. Needs PROXIMO_PBS_* config.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
diskYesBare block device or partition name to wipe (e.g. 'sda', 'sda1', 'nvme0n1p1') — NOT a /dev/ path. ALL data on the target is destroyed.
nodeNoPBS node name (or 'localhost').localhost
confirmNoFalse (default) returns a dry-run PLAN only; True executes the irreversible wipe.
proximo_targetNoWhich configured Proxmox target to run this call against — a target name from your multi-target config (a specific PVE/PBS/PMG/PDM box). Omit to use the single/default target from the environment; the selection applies only to this call.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, but the description covers mutation, high risk, no undo, destructive behavior, dry-run vs confirm, return values (plan vs submitted status), and config requirement. Does not detail permissions or error conditions, but is thorough overall.

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?

Description is four sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then comparison, then behavior, then config requirement. No wasted words; efficiently conveys critical information.

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?

For a high-risk mutation tool, the description covers risk, sibling differentiation, dry-run safety, and output format. Missing permission requirements, but schema and output schema supplement. Good completeness overall.

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% with good parameter descriptions. The tool description adds little beyond the schema: it repeats dry-run behavior for 'confirm' and clarifies that 'disk' can be a partition (already in schema). 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 clearly states the tool wipes ALL data and partition table on a PBS disk or partition. It uses specific verbs and resource, and distinguishes from sibling pbs_node_disk_initgpt by noting greater destructiveness and ability to target partitions.

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 explains dry-run default confirm behavior, compares destructiveness to initgpt, and notes that 'disk' can be a partition. It implicitly advises caution but lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance for scenarios where initgpt would be safer.

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/john-broadway/proximo'

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