Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
truenas-ws-mcp

truenas-ws-mcp

by thoriphes
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

create_dataset

Create new ZFS datasets on TrueNAS Scale with configurable compression, quota, recordsize, and comments.

Instructions

Create a new ZFS dataset.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "create_dataset"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
typeNoFILESYSTEM
compressionNo
quotaNo
recordsizeNo
commentsNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

C2.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Create a new ZFS dataset' but does not mention side effects (e.g., immediate effect on storage), permission requirements, or return value despite an output schema existing. The agent cannot assess consequences.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

At 6 words, the description is extremely concise but under-specifies the tool. It is not front-loaded with key details; the brevity sacrifices clarity and completeness.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given 6 parameters (5 optional), an output schema, and no annotations, the description is grossly incomplete. It fails to explain parameter purposes, return value, or operational context, making it difficult for the agent to use correctly.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description adds no information about any of the 6 parameters. The agent must infer meaning from parameter names alone, which is insufficient for proper usage, especially for 'type' and 'compression' options.

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 clearly states the action (create) and resource (ZFS dataset), distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_dataset and update_dataset. However, it does not elaborate on what a ZFS dataset is, which is a minor gap.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool, prerequisites, or alternatives. For example, it does not mention that a parent dataset might need to exist or that quotas require specific schema. The agent receives no context for decision-making.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools