vmware-nsx

create_ip_pool

Creates an IP address pool with one static subnet and allocation range for NSX consumers, preventing overlapping ranges and verifying usage after creation.

Instructions

[WRITE] Create an IP address pool with one static subnet and allocation range.

IP pools supply addresses to NSX consumers such as tunnel endpoints. Run list_ip_pools first to avoid overlapping ranges; start_ip and end_ip must both fall inside cidr. The same pool_id overwrites (PUT). Returns {"created", "pool_id", "subnets_created", "subnets_failed"}. If the subnet failed it also has "error": the pool itself WAS created and needs cleaning up (the error says how). Other failures return {"error", "hint"}. Verify with get_ip_pool_usage; delete_ip_pool is the inverse.

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": {
      "pool_id": "<pool_id>",
      "display_name": "<display_name>",
      "start_ip": "<start_ip>",
      "end_ip": "<end_ip>",
      "cidr": "<cidr>"
    },
    "name": "create_ip_pool"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cidr`	Yes	Subnet containing the range, e.g. "192.168.1.0/24".
`end_ip`	Yes	Last allocatable IPv4 address, e.g. "192.168.1.100".
`target`	No	NSX Manager target from config (default if omitted).
`pool_id`	Yes	Unique id (alphanumerics, hyphens, underscores only); becomes /infra/ip-pools/<pool_id>.
`start_ip`	Yes	First allocatable IPv4 address, e.g. "192.168.1.10".
`gateway_ip`	No	Subnet default gateway, e.g. "192.168.1.1".
`display_name`	Yes	UI display name.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed8 schema fields changedv1.8.16Sep 1, 2026

addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```

addedInput schema / properties / cidr / description

Added value: +"Subnet containing the range, e.g. \"192.168.1.0/24\"."

addedInput schema / properties / display_name / description
```
Added value: +"UI display name."
```

addedInput schema / properties / end_ip / description

Added value: +"Last allocatable IPv4 address, e.g. \"192.168.1.100\"."

addedInput schema / properties / gateway_ip / description

Added value: +"Subnet default gateway, e.g. \"192.168.1.1\"."

addedInput schema / properties / pool_id / description

Added value: +"Unique id (alphanumerics, hyphens, underscores only); becomes /infra/ip-pools/<pool_id>."

addedInput schema / properties / start_ip / description

Added value: +"First allocatable IPv4 address, e.g. \"192.168.1.10\"."

addedInput schema / properties / target / description

Added value: +"NSX Manager target from config (default if omitted)."

First observedv1.3.2Mar 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description explains key runtime behaviors beyond the annotations: the same pool_id overwrites via PUT, partial failure semantics where the pool may exist even if subnet creation failed, and what error formats to expect. The write nature is already visible from readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds valuable failure/cleanup context.

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 dense but every sentence adds value: operation type, purpose, precondition, constraint, overwrite semantics, return behavior, and verification/inverse actions. It is front-loaded with the write marker and primary action.

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 write operation with no output schema, the description fully covers what the agent needs: return shape, partial failure mode, error structure, verification step, and inverse tool. This is a complete, self-contained description for a complex multi-step tool.

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 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds the crucial constraint that start_ip and end_ip must both fall inside cidr, and that pool_id acts as the PUT identifier, which is not evident from the schema alone.

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 identifies the operation as creating an IP address pool with a static subnet and allocation range, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by naming list_ip_pools, get_ip_pool_usage, and delete_ip_pool.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when and how to use the tool: run list_ip_pools first to avoid overlapping ranges, verify with get_ip_pool_usage, and notes that delete_ip_pool is the inverse. This goes beyond implied usage and routes the agent correctly.

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