Skip to main content
Glama

pve_sdn_vnet_firewall_rule_remove

Remove an SDN vnet firewall rule by position. Dry-run to preview; set confirm=true to execute and affect live guest traffic.

Instructions

MUTATION (LIVE/IMMEDIATE): delete a vnet firewall rule by position. Dry-run by default — the PLAN shows the rule at that position. RISK_MEDIUM floor. Synchronous — confirm=True returns {"status": "ok", "result": None}; no task UPID to poll.

Takes effect on live guest traffic THE INSTANT you confirm — no pve_sdn_apply gate, no pve_sdn_rollback coverage. Positions SHIFT after inserts/deletes. UNLIKE the guest/ cluster/node firewall family, this endpoint's reads never expose a digest (schema-verified) — the PLAN's captured rule is best-effort identity evidence only, not an optimistic lock; supply digest ONLY if you have one from out-of-band, and confirming with none (the default) is the normal, supported path. No UNDO — revert by re-adding the rule with pve_sdn_vnet_firewall_rule_add.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
posYesRule position (0-based index) to delete.
vnetYesSDN vnet name.
digestNoOPTIONAL optimistic-lock passthrough, forwarded verbatim when given. NEVER required, NEVER derived: this endpoint's reads (rules list / rule get) expose no digest field on this schema at all (schema-verified), so the PLAN cannot supply one — pass a digest only if you obtained one out-of-band.
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?

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: mutation is live/immediate, takes effect instantly, no apply gate, no rollback. It explains digest parameter never required/derived, synchronous response format, and risk level. All key behaviors are transparently documented.

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 well-structured with each sentence adding value, but it is somewhat verbose (multiple paragraphs). It is front-loaded with the key action, but could be slightly more concise while retaining all critical information.

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 (mutation with dry-run, plan, digest nuances, safety considerations) and the existence of an output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: purpose, usage pattern, safety, digest behavior, recovery, and response format. It is comprehensive and leaves no critical gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, and the description adds significant extra meaning beyond schema. For example, it explains that positions shift after inserts/deletes, that digest is never required and cannot be supplied by the PLAN, and that confirm controls dry-run vs execution. This extra context is valuable for correct usage.

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 action ('delete a vnet firewall rule by position') and identifies the resource ('SDN vnet firewall rule'). It differentiates from sibling tools like pve_sdn_vnet_firewall_rule_add, get, and update, and explicitly contrasts with the guest/cluster/node firewall family.

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 guidance on when to use: delete a rule by position. It explains dry-run default behavior, positions shifting, and the recovery path via pve_sdn_vnet_firewall_rule_add. It also contrasts with other firewall families, giving clear context for appropriate use.

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