instabox-mcp

Refresh a machine's Secret delivery

instabox_refresh_machine_secrets

Pushes the current Secret selection to a running machine, installs its environment and CA, and requests proxy reconciliation so you can verify proxy and guest statuses.

Instructions

Push the current Secret selection to a RUNNING machine now (installs the environment and CA, requests proxy reconciliation). Check the returned proxy and guest statuses.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "instabox_refresh_machine_secrets"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Machine ID (m_...) or its unique name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 1, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the mutation profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false). The description adds genuine behavioral detail beyond them: it installs the environment and CA, triggers proxy reconciliation, and advises checking returned proxy and guest statuses – useful since no output schema exists.

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?

Two tight sentences; the action and its scope come first, followed by the post-call verification hint. No filler.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a single-parameter mutation with annotations and no output schema, the description covers what it does, the required machine state, its side effects, and what to inspect afterward. It could still say what happens if the machine is not running or whether the stored selection is modified.

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?

There is only one parameter and schema coverage is 100%, with the schema explaining that id accepts a machine ID (m_...) or unique name. The description never references the id parameter, but its 'RUNNING machine' constraint adds a relevant pre-condition. Baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a specific verb+resource: it pushes the *current* Secret selection to a machine, which implicitly distinguishes it from tools that read or change the selection. It stops short of naming the sibling it complements (e.g. instabox_update_machine_secrets), so an agent must infer the pairing.

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?

Clear usage context is provided: use it on a RUNNING machine to apply the selection already in place, and it takes effect 'now'. There is no explicit when-not guidance or named alternative, but the precondition is stated.

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