SemaphoreUI MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

create_template

Define a new Ansible template with project, playbook, inventory, repository, environment, and optional task settings to automate runs.

Instructions

Create a new template.

Args: project_id: ID of the project name: Template name playbook: Playbook file path (e.g., "playbook.yml") inventory_id: Inventory ID repository_id: Repository ID environment_id: Environment ID description: Template description (optional) arguments: Extra arguments as JSON string (optional) allow_override_args_in_task: Allow overriding arguments in task (default: False) suppress_success_alerts: Suppress success alerts (default: False) app: Application type (default: "ansible") git_branch: Git branch to use (optional) survey_vars: Survey variables for prompting (optional) vaults: Vault configurations (optional) template_type: Template type - "", "build", or "deploy" (optional) start_version: Start version (optional) build_template_id: Build template ID for deploy templates (optional) autorun: Enable autorun (default: False) view_id: View ID (optional) task_params: App-specific task parameters (optional). For Ansible templates: - allow_override_limit: Allow task-level --limit override (required for run_task limit) - allow_override_inventory: Allow task-level inventory override - allow_override_tags: Allow task-level --tags override - allow_override_skip_tags: Allow task-level --skip-tags override - limit: Default limit (list of hosts/groups) - tags: Default tags (list) - skip_tags: Default skip tags (list) allow_parallel_tasks: Allow several tasks of this template to run at once (default: False) allow_override_branch_in_task: Allow overriding the git branch in task (default: False) runner_tag: Runner tag (optional)

Returns: Created template details

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`app`	No	ansible
`name`	Yes
`vaults`	No
`autorun`	No
`view_id`	No
`playbook`	Yes
`arguments`	No
`git_branch`	No
`project_id`	Yes
`runner_tag`	No
`description`	No
`survey_vars`	No
`task_params`	No
`inventory_id`	Yes
`repository_id`	Yes
`start_version`	No
`template_type`	No
`environment_id`	Yes
`build_template_id`	No
`allow_parallel_tasks`	No
`suppress_success_alerts`	No
`allow_override_args_in_task`	No
`allow_override_branch_in_task`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv1.0.6Sep 25, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / allow_override_branch_in_task

Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "title": "Allow Override Branch In Task",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / allow_parallel_tasks

Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "title": "Allow Parallel Tasks",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / runner_tag

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Runner Tag"
+}

First observedv1.0.4Jun 3, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the mutation ('Create') and that it returns 'Created template details', but says nothing about persistence side effects, duplicate-name behavior, permission requirements, failure modes, or the operational consequence that the created template becomes executable by run_task. The return description is a vague stub.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is appropriately sized for 23 parameters and front-loads the core purpose sentence before the Args list. However, the structure is a flat, monotonous parameter dump with no logical grouping (required vs optional, Ansible-specific vs general), making it harder for an agent to scan. Every line technically earns its place, but the organization does not aid quick comprehension.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return-value details are covered elsewhere, and the parameter side is comprehensively documented. What is missing is operational context: no explanation of what a template is in this domain, when to set template_type to build vs deploy, the relationship between build_template_id and deploy pipelines, or the structure expected for vaults and survey_vars objects. For a 23-parameter create tool with zero annotations, this is adequate but incomplete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does substantially. Every one of the 23 parameters gets at least a one-line explanation, and several add real meaning beyond the schema: playbook includes an example format, template_type lists its allowed values ('build'/'deploy'), build_template_id explains its role for deploy templates, and task_params breaks down Ansible-specific sub-keys. Some entries merely restate names (name, inventory_id), but the overall compensation is strong.

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?

The first sentence 'Create a new template' states a specific verb and resource, and the name differentiates it from sibling tools like update_template, delete_template, and get_template. However, it never explains what a 'template' is in this system (an automation playbook configuration), so an agent unfamiliar with the domain gets no conceptual grounding.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides zero guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is the prerequisite for run_task, nor contrast with update_template for modifications or create_schedule for recurring runs. Usage is only implied by the verb 'Create' in the name, not by any explicit direction.

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

Deploy Server