Skip to main content
Glama

pve_firewall_rule_remove

Remove a firewall rule by position. Dry-run returns a plan and digest; confirm with digest to ensure the rule hasn't shifted due to concurrent edits.

Instructions

MUTATION: delete a firewall rule by position. Dry-run by default — the PLAN shows the rule at that position AND the optimistic-lock digest. Positions SHIFT after inserts/deletes — pass the digest from the plan back as digest= on confirm so PVE rejects the delete if the rule list moved since the preview (otherwise a concurrent insert can shift positions and remove the wrong rule). Synchronous — confirm=True returns {"status": "ok", "result": None}; no task UPID to poll.

No UNDO: firewall config isn't in guest snapshots — revert by re-adding the rule with pve_firewall_rule_add.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
posYesRule position (0-based index) in the target scope's rule list.
kindNoGuest kind for scope='guest': 'qemu' or 'lxc'.
nodeNoNode name, required for scope='node' or scope='guest'.
vmidNoGuest VMID/CTID, required for scope='guest'.
scopeNoFirewall scope: 'cluster', 'node', or 'guest'.cluster
digestNoOptimistic-lock digest from the PLAN preview; pass on confirm to abort if the rule list changed since.
confirmNoSet True to execute the mutation; False (default) only returns a dry-run PLAN.
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?

All behaviors are disclosed: mutation, dry-run default, synchronous, no task UPID, no undo, and the optimistic-locking digest. No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden and does so excellently.

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?

Well-structured with a clear opening, then digest explanation, then sync/undo notes. Slightly lengthy but every sentence adds 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?

Given the tool's complexity (optimistic locking, dry-run) and existence of an output schema, the description is fully complete, covering workflow, safety, and side effects.

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 significant context: explains the digest workflow, confirm flag purpose, and the PLAN output. This goes beyond the schema descriptions.

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 'delete a firewall rule by position', specifying the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools by noting the undo is via pve_firewall_rule_add and implies it's the only removal tool.

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?

It explains the dry-run confirm workflow and the digest mechanism for safety. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use, though the context is clear.

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