SemaphoreUI MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

update_template

Modify an existing SemaphoreUI Ansible template by changing playbook, inventory, environment, or task parameters, while preserving all unspecified settings.

Instructions

Update an existing template.

Args: project_id: ID of the project template_id: ID of the template to update name: Template name (optional) playbook: Playbook file path (optional) inventory_id: Inventory ID (optional) repository_id: Repository ID (optional) environment_id: Environment ID (optional) description: Template description (optional) arguments: Extra arguments (optional) allow_override_args_in_task: Allow overriding arguments (optional) suppress_success_alerts: Suppress success alerts (optional) app: Application type (optional) git_branch: Git branch (optional) survey_vars: Survey variables (optional) vaults: Vault configurations (optional) template_type: Template type (optional) start_version: Start version (optional) build_template_id: Build template ID (optional) autorun: Enable autorun (optional) 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 parallel tasks (optional) allow_override_branch_in_task: Allow overriding the git branch in task (optional) runner_tag: Runner tag (optional)

Fields not passed keep their current value.

Returns: Empty dict on success

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`app`	No
`name`	No
`vaults`	No
`autorun`	No
`view_id`	No
`playbook`	No
`arguments`	No
`git_branch`	No
`project_id`	Yes
`runner_tag`	No
`description`	No
`survey_vars`	No
`task_params`	No
`template_id`	Yes
`inventory_id`	No
`repository_id`	No
`start_version`	No
`template_type`	No
`environment_id`	No
`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: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Allow Override Branch In Task"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / allow_parallel_tasks

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Allow Parallel Tasks"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / runner_tag

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

First observedv1.0.4Jun 3, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It does disclose the important partial-update behavior ('Fields not passed keep their current value') and the success return type, but it does not cover permissions, error behavior, or side effects on existing/running template data.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The format is compact: a one-line purpose, a consistently marked Args block, and final notes on update semantics and return value. For a 24-parameter tool the length is justified, though the sheer number of repetitive '(optional)' lines makes it less elegant than it could be.

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?

Considering the tool's complexity and lack of annotations, the description covers parameter meaning and partial-update semantics but leaves gaps: no constraints on formats for vaults/survey_vars, no allowed values for app/template_type, and no error/validation behavior. It is functional but not a complete guide.

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%, and this parameter list is the only explanation of 24 arguments, so it is essential. It gives non-obvious meanings (e.g., playbook path, inventory/repository IDs, Ansible-specific task_params) and optionality. A few entries are near-tautological ('template_type: Template type'), preventing a perfect score.

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 opening sentence names the exact operation and resource: 'Update an existing template.' The word 'existing' distinguishes it from sibling create_template, and the parameter list confirms what can be changed. This is specific and not a tautology of the tool name.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives such as create_template for new templates or delete_template for removal. The only hint is the word 'existing', which weakly implies this tool is for modifying templates that already exist. This leaves the agent to infer routing from the sibling list.

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

Deploy Server