Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
portainer-mcp-server

portainer-mcp-server

by hlavrencic
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

get_stack_file

Fetches the docker-compose file content for a stack by its ID, enabling configuration inspection.

Instructions

Get the docker-compose file content of a stack

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": {
      "stackId": "<stackId>"
    },
    "name": "get_stack_file"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
stackIdYesStack ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get the docker-compose file content,' without elaborating on return format, error behavior, permissions required, or any side effects. For a read operation, this is minimal but lacks useful context beyond the basic action.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant information. It conveys the essential purpose efficiently.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one fully described parameter, no complex logic), the description sufficiently explains what it does and what the agent needs to provide. However, the absence of any output schema or behavioral notes means the agent may not know the exact structure of the returned content, but this is not a major gap for such a straightforward getter.

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 schema covers the only parameter (stackId) with a clear description ('Stack ID'). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 ('Get') and resource ('docker-compose file content of a stack'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like inspect_stack or list_stacks. It unambiguously states what the tool returns.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The usage is implied: the agent should use this when the docker-compose file content of a stack is needed. However, there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or mention of alternatives like inspect_stack, which might provide similar stack information.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools