Skip to main content
Glama

pve_firewall_rule_update

Update an existing firewall rule at a specified position using optimistic locking for safe concurrent changes. Dry-run previews modifications; pass digest to confirm.

Instructions

MUTATION: update an existing firewall rule at position pos. Dry-run by default — the PLAN shows the rule's current state, the fields being changed, AND the optimistic-lock digest. Pass the digest from the plan back as digest= on confirm so PVE rejects the update if the rule list moved since the preview (positions shift and the wrong rule can be updated otherwise). Synchronous — confirm=True returns {"status": "ok", "result": None}; no task UPID to poll.

Only the fields you pass are changed; omitted ones keep their current value. No UNDO — revert by updating the rule back to its prior values, or remove it with pve_firewall_rule_remove.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
posYesRule position (0-based index) in the target scope's rule list.
destNoNew destination address/CIDR/alias to match; omit to leave unchanged.
kindNoGuest kind for scope='guest': 'qemu' or 'lxc'.
nodeNoNode name, required for scope='node' or scope='guest'.
vmidNoGuest VMID/CTID, required for scope='guest'.
dportNoNew destination port or port range; omit to leave unchanged.
protoNoNew IP protocol to match, e.g. 'tcp'/'udp'/'icmp'; omit to leave unchanged.
scopeNoFirewall scope: 'cluster', 'node', or 'guest'.cluster
sportNoNew source port or port range; omit to leave unchanged.
actionNoNew rule action: 'ACCEPT', 'DROP', or 'REJECT'; omit to leave unchanged.
digestNoOptimistic-lock digest from the PLAN preview; pass on confirm to abort if the rule list changed since.
enableNoNew enabled state for the rule; omit to leave unchanged.
sourceNoNew source address/CIDR/alias to match; omit to leave unchanged.
commentNoNew free-text comment; omit to leave unchanged.
confirmNoSet True to execute the mutation; False (default) only returns a dry-run PLAN.
directionNoNew traffic direction: 'in' or 'out'; omit to leave unchanged.
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 exist, so the description fully covers behavioral traits: it's a synchronous mutation with dry-run capability, detailed plan output including digest, no UNDO, and no task UPID. The risk of updating the wrong rule due to position shifts is explicitly mentioned.

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 fairly long but well-structured with a clear progression: main purpose, dry-run/confirm workflow, partial update semantics, and undo guidance. Every sentence adds value, though minor compression could be possible.

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 (17 parameters, optimistic locking, dry-run pattern), the description is comprehensive. It explains the workflow, risks, return format, and ties into related tools. No gaps remain for correct agent usage.

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%, so baseline 3. The description adds context for the `digest` parameter (optimistic lock from plan) and `confirm` (dry-run vs execute), which are critical to the workflow. This justifies a 4, though the schema already describes each parameter individually.

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 updates an existing firewall rule at position `pos`, with a 'MUTATION' prefix. It distinguishes from sibling tools by referencing `pve_firewall_rule_remove` for undo and implying differentiation from `pve_firewall_rule_add` via the update context.

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?

The description provides explicit when-to-use guidance: the dry-run/confirm workflow, optimistic locking via `digest`, and the pattern of only passing changed fields. It names the alternative tool for removal and warns about position shifts.

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