spinnaker-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Get pipeline config

get_pipeline

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch full pipeline configuration by application and name to review stages, triggers, and parameters before triggering or modifying it.

Instructions

Get the full configuration of a specific pipeline by application and pipeline name. Use this to inspect pipeline stages, triggers, and parameters before triggering or modifying it. Returns the complete pipeline JSON definition including all stage configurations.

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": {
      "application": "<application>",
      "pipeline_name": "<pipeline_name>"
    },
    "name": "get_pipeline"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`application`	Yes	Application name as registered in Spinnaker
`pipeline_name`	Yes	Pipeline name as shown in the Spinnaker UI

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	No	Number of records in items.
`items`	No	The records, when Gate answered with a list.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.4.1Nov 1, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "description": "The Gate response. A JSON object from Gate comes back as is; a JSON array comes back as {items, count}.",
+  "properties": {
+    "count": {
+      "description": "Number of records in items.",
+      "minimum": 0,
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "items": {
+      "description": "The records, when Gate answered with a list.",
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv0.1.0Apr 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by stating that it returns the complete pipeline JSON definition, including stage configurations, which helps set expectations for output.

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 three focused sentences with no wasted text. Purpose, usage context, and return content are front-loaded in a logical order.

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 simple two-parameter read tool with rich annotations and an output schema, the description is complete enough. It explains the lookup scope, intended inspection use, and the general shape of the returned configuration.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description restates that lookup uses application and pipeline name but adds no extra semantics such as matching rules or case sensitivity, making baseline 3 appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb-resource pairing: get the full configuration of a specific pipeline, scoped by application and pipeline name. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling list/history tools by emphasizing the complete configuration for one named pipeline.

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?

It gives clear usage context: inspect pipeline stages, triggers, and parameters before triggering or modifying the pipeline. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as list_pipelines for discovering pipeline names, so it falls short of full when/when-not guidance.

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