Skip to main content
Glama

delete_snapshot

Destructive

Remove a specific pvewarden snapshot by name from a Proxmox guest while leaving other snapshots untouched; use list_snapshots to find the name.

Instructions

Delete one pvewarden snapshot of a guest by name (requires tag 'pvewarden-update'); other snapshots are never touched. Get the name from list_snapshots. Use it to remove specific snapshots; delete_old_snapshots removes by age. pvewarden asks the user to confirm in the client; if they decline, nothing changes.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
vmidYesProxmox VMID of the guest, e.g. 101 (see list_guests).
snapshotYesSnapshot name as list_snapshots shows it. pvewarden snapshots are named pvewarden_YYYYMMDD_HHMMSS (UTC); only those can be used here.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / snapshot / description
      Added value: +"Snapshot name as list_snapshots shows it. pvewarden snapshots are named pvewarden_YYYYMMDD_HHMMSS (UTC); only those can be used here."
    • addedInput schema / properties / vmid / description
      Added value: +"Proxmox VMID of the guest, e.g. 101 (see list_guests)."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description discloses the tag requirement ('pvewarden-update'), guarantees that other snapshots are never touched, and explains the client-side confirmation flow including no-change on decline. These are meaningful behavioral details for a destructive operation.

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?

The description is three tight sentences with the destructive scope and prerequisites front-loaded. Every sentence adds useful information with no wasted wording.

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 destructive snapshot-deletion tool with no output schema, the description covers prerequisites, the safe-scope guarantee, the alternative tool, and the confirmation behavior. Nothing essential for correct invocation appears to be missing.

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 already 100%, and the schema documents both vmid and snapshot thoroughly. The description adds only minor usage context ('Get the name from list_snapshots'), which is largely redundant with the schema's own reference. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a specific verb and resource: delete one pvewarden snapshot of a guest by name. It scopes the operation ('other snapshots are never touched') and distinguishes it from delete_old_snapshots, which removes by age.

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?

It explicitly tells the agent to get the snapshot name from list_snapshots and to use this tool to remove specific snapshots. It also names the alternative delete_old_snapshots and the condition under which that alternative applies.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.