Skip to main content
Glama

pve_ceph_mon_destroy

Destroy a Ceph Monitor with a dry-run plan that assesses quorum-loss risk. Confirm to execute the deletion.

Instructions

MUTATION: destroy a Ceph Monitor. PVE refuses to remove the LAST monitor of the cluster (schema truth); does not destroy any Manager on the same node.

RISK_HIGH: quorum-loss risk if too few monitors remain. cmd-safety ADVISORY citation (action=destroy, service=mon) is included in the plan's blast_radius — fail-open, never a gate (an unreachable check degrades to an honest "cmd-safety unavailable" line). CAPTURE-or- declare: reads the current monitor list before planning; if unreadable -> complete=False. Dry-run by default (returns a PLAN); confirm=True executes (DELETE /nodes/{node}/ceph/mon/{monid}) and returns {"status": "submitted", "result": }. No rollback primitive on this plane — recreate with pve_ceph_mon_create (a NEW monitor, not a byte-for-byte restore).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nodeNoPVE node the monitor is on; defaults to the configured node if omitted.
monidYesID of the monitor to destroy.
confirmNoFalse (default) returns a dry-run PLAN only; True executes the destroy.
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?

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. Discloses mutation, quorum risk, last-monitor refusal, no manager destruction, dry-run default, confirm execution, CAPTURE-or-declare logic, and no rollback. Comprehensive.

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?

Reasonably concise and front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence serves a purpose, though a minor reduction in technical details could improve conciseness without losing value.

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?

Covers all necessary aspects: behavior, risks, workflow, error handling (last monitor), and recovery path. Output schema is present, so return values need not be explained. Complete for effective agent use.

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 detailed schema descriptions. Description adds overall workflow context (dry-run/confirm) but does not significantly extend parameter meaning beyond the 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?

Explicitly states 'destroy a Ceph Monitor' and clarifies it does not destroy managers. Distinguishes from sibling tool pve_ceph_mon_create via a direct reference. No ambiguity.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Provides clear when-to-use (destroy a monitor), when-not-to (refuses last monitor), and alternatives (pve_ceph_mon_create). Includes risk context (quorum loss) and workflow (dry-run then confirm).

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