spinnaker-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Get task

get_task

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the status, timing, retries, and step details of a Spinnaker orchestration task by ID so you can monitor long-running deploy, resize, rollback, or delete operations.

Instructions

Get the status and details of a Spinnaker orchestration task (e.g., deploy, resize, rollback, delete). Use this to monitor the progress of a long-running infrastructure operation. Returns JSON with task status, start/end times, retry info, and step-by-step execution details.

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": {
      "task_id": "<task_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_task"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`task_id`	Yes	Orchestration task ID returned by Spinnaker when an operation is submitted

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

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds value by previewing the response shape — status, start/end times, retry info, step-by-step execution details — which signals a potentially large payload. It is slightly redundant with the output schema and says nothing about behavior for unknown or expired task IDs.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then usage context, then return shape. No filler or restatement of the title.

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?

With annotations, a fully documented single parameter, and an output schema, the description covers what the tool does and what comes back. Minor gaps remain around error/expiry behavior for long-running tasks, but nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

The single task_id parameter is documented at 100% schema coverage ('Orchestration task ID returned by Spinnaker when an operation is submitted'), so the schema carries the semantics. The description adds nothing beyond that about where the ID comes from or what happens with an invalid ID — baseline 3 for a fully covered single-param schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get the status and details of a Spinnaker orchestration task') and enumerates example task types (deploy, resize, rollback, delete), which distinguishes it from sibling pipeline/execution tools implicitly. It never names get_execution or list_executions explicitly, so the sibling differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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?

'Use this to monitor the progress of a long-running infrastructure operation' gives a clear trigger condition for calling the tool. However, no exclusions or named alternatives are provided — an agent must guess whether get_execution, list_executions, or search_executions is the better choice for a related lookup.

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