Skip to main content
Glama

pve_ceph_fs_create

Create a Ceph filesystem (CephFS) with new metadata and data pools. Use dry-run to review the plan, then confirm to execute the operation.

Instructions

MUTATION: create a Ceph filesystem (CephFS).

RISK_MEDIUM: allocates a new metadata pool + data pool; requires at least one MDS to actually serve it (pve_ceph_mds_create). name defaults to the literal 'cephfs' when omitted. No upstream cmd-safety check exists for filesystem creation. CAPTURE-or-declare: reads the current filesystem list before planning (also readable directly via pve_ceph_fs_list, ADVERSARIAL — taint marked when tracking is on); if unreadable -> complete=False. Dry-run by default (returns a PLAN); confirm=True executes (POST /nodes/{node}/ceph/fs/{name}) and returns {"status": "submitted", "result": }. No rollback primitive on this plane — revert with pve_ceph_fs_destroy(name=...).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoFilesystem name; defaults to 'cephfs' if omitted. No ':', '/', or whitespace.
nodeNoPVE node to create the filesystem on; defaults to the configured node if omitted.
pg_numNoNumber of placement groups for the backing data pool (8-32768, default 128). The metadata pool uses a quarter of this.
confirmNoFalse (default) returns a dry-run PLAN only; True executes the create.
add_storageNoConfigure the created CephFS as PVE storage for this cluster. Schema-defaults False.
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
Behavior5/5

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

Disclosures include mutation risk, default dry-run, confirm execution, no rollback (revert via destroy), no upstream cmd-safety check, CAPTURE-or-declare pattern, and adversarial taint marking when reading filesystem list. No annotations exist, so description carries full burden and meets it thoroughly.

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?

Well-structured with risk indicator, prerequisites, defaults, execution flow, and fallback. Every sentence adds value; no redundancy. Concise given the complexity of the tool.

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 complex mutation tool with 6 parameters and no annotations, the description covers risk, prerequisites, behavior, return type (plan or UPID), and recovery path. Output schema exists but description focuses on behavioral context.

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%, but the description adds value: name defaults to 'cephfs', metadata pool uses quarter of pg_num, add_storage defaults false, and explains confirm parameter's dry-run vs execution behavior. Matches baseline of 3 and adds useful context.

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 it creates a Ceph filesystem, allocating metadata and data pools. It distinguishes from sibling tools like pve_ceph_fs_list and pve_ceph_fs_destroy, and mentions the need for an MDS.

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?

Provides context on when to use (create CephFS) and prerequisites (MDS creation via pve_ceph_mds_create). Explains dry-run vs confirm behavior, but does not explicitly list cases when not to use or alternatives beyond destroy.

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