Skip to main content
Glama

install_uninstall

Destructive

Stops an installed app and removes its containers while preserving the app directory and volumes on disk; use install_purge to delete those files instead.

Instructions

Stop an installed app and remove its containers. The app directory and its volumes stay on disk; install_purge is the one that deletes them. warning is present when part of the app's state is in Docker volumes outside the app directory, left there by an earlier install

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": {
      "app": "<app>"
    },
    "name": "install_uninstall"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
appYesApp name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.10.2

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, yet the description adds meaningful detail: containers are removed while the app directory and volumes remain on disk, and it explains the 'warning' signal's meaning (state stranded in Docker volumes from an earlier install). That is exactly the beyond-annotation context an agent needs before a destructive call.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with what happens, then what is preserved, then the alternative. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 destructive single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, the preservation boundary, the sibling alternative, and even the semantics of a returned warning. Nothing needed to call it safely 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?

There is a single parameter ('app') with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema carries the semantics. The description adds no format or constraint details beyond the schema, which is the baseline case.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: 'Stop an installed app and remove its containers'. It immediately scopes what is removed versus kept, which distinguishes it from siblings like install_purge and docker_stop.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to the alternative: 'install_purge is the one that deletes them', giving a clear selection condition. It does not distinguish from other stop-like siblings (docker_stop), but the main ambiguity is resolved.

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