PNETLab MCP Server

get_template_options

Retrieve valid fields and defaults for a node template to configure add-node parameters correctly before adding a node.

Instructions

Get a node template's add-node option schema — the valid/default fields for that image (e.g. ram, ethernet count, image filename, nvram). Use before add_node to pick correct parameters. Get template keys from list_images.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "template": "<template>"
    },
    "name": "get_template_options"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`template`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It implies a read-only query by describing it as getting a schema, and hints at safe usage before add_node. It could explicitly state idempotency or lack of side effects, but the context is sufficient.

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words. First sentence states purpose, second gives usage guidance, third provides input source. Front-loaded and efficient.

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 an output schema is present, the description need not detail return values. It covers purpose, usage workflow, and input source—fully complete for a simple query tool with one parameter.

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 description coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It explains the 'template' parameter expects a key from list_images and gives examples of returned fields, adding meaning beyond the schema's bare type.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'node template's add-node option schema', with concrete examples of returned fields. It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly referencing add_node and list_images.

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 explicitly advises 'Use before add_node to pick correct parameters' and directs the user to 'Get template keys from list_images', providing clear when-to-use and where-to-get-input context.

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