Skip to main content
Glama

stack_remove

Destructive

Remove one or more Docker swarm stacks, tearing down their services, networks, and secrets. Destructive operation stops and deletes every service in the stack.

Instructions

Remove one or more stacks from the swarm (tears down their services, networks, and secrets).

Destructive: this stops and deletes every service in the named stack(s) — the reverse of stack_deploy and the swarm analogue of compose_down. Defaults to detach=True so the call returns once removal is requested rather than waiting for teardown. Does not raise on a non-zero CLI exit — inspect returncode/stderr in the result.

args: names - One or more stack names to remove. At least one is required. detach - Return immediately (True) vs wait for the stack(s) to be fully removed (False) timeout_seconds - Subprocess timeout (default 300s) returns: dict - {"returncode": int, "stdout": str, "stderr": str, "truncated": bool}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
namesYes
detachNo
timeout_secondsNo
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark destructive=true and readOnly=false. Description adds specifics: tears down services/networks/secrets, returns immediately with detach=True, does not raise exceptions, and describes return format.

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?

Compact and well-structured: purpose first, then behavioral notes, then parameter descriptions. Every sentence adds value with no repetition or fluff.

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?

Covers all essential aspects: purpose, destructive side effects, default behavior, error handling, parameter meanings, and return format. No output schema needed given the detailed return description.

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

Parameters5/5

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

With 0% schema coverage, description fully explains all three parameters: names (required, list), detach (immediate vs wait), timeout_seconds (default 300). Also documents return value structure.

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 tool removes stacks from a swarm, listing specific resources torn down (services, networks, secrets). It distinguishes from siblings like stack_deploy (reverse) and compose_down (swarm analogue).

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?

Explicitly provides when-to-use context (reverse of stack_deploy), default behavior (detach=True), and how to handle errors (inspect returncode/stderr). Also mentions destructive nature, guiding when not to use.

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/GavinLucas/docker-mcp'

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