Skip to main content
Glama
moimran

EVE-NG MCP Server

by moimran

wipe_node

Reset a node to factory state in EVE-NG by deleting all user configuration, including startup-config and VLANs, so the next start rebuilds from the selected image.

Instructions

Wipe a specific node (reset to factory state).

This tool wipes a node, deleting all user configuration including startup-config, VLANs, and other settings. The next start will rebuild the node from the selected image.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
argumentsYes

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function for the wipe_node MCP tool. It validates input using NodeControlArgs, checks connection, calls the EVENGClientWrapper.wipe_node helper, and formats the response as TextContent.
    @mcp.tool()
    async def wipe_node(arguments: NodeControlArgs) -> list[TextContent]:
        """
        Wipe a specific node (reset to factory state).
    
        This tool wipes a node, deleting all user configuration including
        startup-config, VLANs, and other settings. The next start will
        rebuild the node from the selected image.
        """
        try:
            logger.info(f"Wiping node {arguments.node_id} in {arguments.lab_path}")
    
            if not eveng_client.is_connected:
                return [TextContent(
                    type="text",
                    text="Not connected to EVE-NG server. Use connect_eveng_server tool first."
                )]
    
            # Wipe node
            result = await eveng_client.wipe_node(arguments.lab_path, arguments.node_id)
    
            if result.get('status') == 'success':
                return [TextContent(
                    type="text",
                    text=f"Successfully wiped node {arguments.node_id} in {arguments.lab_path}\n\n"
                         f"⚠️  All user configuration has been deleted. The node has been reset to factory state.\n"
                         f"The next start will rebuild the node from the selected image."
                )]
            else:
                return [TextContent(
                    type="text",
                    text=f"Failed to wipe node: {result.get('message', 'Unknown error')}"
                )]
    
        except Exception as e:
            logger.error(f"Failed to wipe node: {e}")
            return [TextContent(
                type="text",
                text=f"Failed to wipe node: {str(e)}"
            )]
  • Pydantic schema defining the input arguments for the wipe_node tool (shared with other node control tools like start_node, stop_node).
    class NodeControlArgs(BaseModel):
        """Arguments for node control operations."""
        lab_path: str = Field(description="Full path to the lab (e.g., /lab_name.unl)")
        node_id: str = Field(description="Node ID to control")
  • Registration call for node management tools, which includes the wipe_node tool via the register_node_tools function.
    # Node management tools
    register_node_tools(mcp, eveng_client)
  • Helper method in EVENGClientWrapper that wraps the underlying EVE-NG API call to wipe_node, with connection management and error handling.
    async def wipe_node(self, lab_path: str, node_id: str) -> Dict[str, Any]:
        """Wipe a specific node (reset to factory state)."""
        await self.ensure_connected()
    
        try:
            result = await asyncio.to_thread(self.api.wipe_node, lab_path, int(node_id))
            self.logger.info("Wiped node", lab_path=lab_path, node_id=node_id)
            return result
        except Exception as e:
            self.logger.error("Failed to wipe node", **log_error(e, {"lab_path": lab_path, "node_id": node_id}))
            raise EVENGAPIError(f"Failed to wipe node: {str(e)}")
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does an excellent job disclosing critical behavioral traits: it's destructive ('deleting all user configuration'), specifies what gets destroyed ('startup-config, VLANs, and other settings'), and describes the outcome ('rebuild the node from the selected image'). It doesn't mention permissions or rate limits, but covers the essential destructive nature well.

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?

Perfectly structured with three sentences: purpose statement, destructive scope, and outcome. Every sentence earns its place with zero waste. The description is front-loaded with the core action and appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description does well on behavioral transparency but completely fails on parameter documentation. It covers the 'what happens' adequately but leaves the agent guessing about 'what to provide'. The combination creates a significant gap in usability despite good behavioral disclosure.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no information about the single required parameter ('arguments') or its nested properties ('lab_path', 'node_id'). The description doesn't compensate for the complete lack of parameter documentation in the schema, leaving the agent with no guidance on what inputs to provide.

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 specific action ('wipe a node', 'reset to factory state') and distinguishes it from siblings like 'delete_node' (removal) and 'wipe_all_nodes' (bulk operation). It specifies the exact resource affected ('a specific node') with precise scope.

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?

The description implies usage context by specifying what gets deleted ('all user configuration') and the outcome ('next start will rebuild'), but doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives like 'delete_node' or 'wipe_all_nodes'. It provides clear operational context but lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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/moimran/eveng-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server