Skip to main content
Glama

argocd-app-status

Check the deployment status of ArgoCD applications in Kubernetes clusters to monitor sync health and resource conditions.

Instructions

Get the status of an ArgoCD application

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
appYesThe name of the ArgoCD application
namespaceNoThe namespace of the application (optional, defaults to argocd namespace)

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the 'argocd-app-status' tool. It destructures the app name and optional namespace (defaulting to 'argocd'), constructs a kubectl command to get the application YAML, executes it using execAsync, and returns the stdout or a fallback message.
    case "argocd-app-status": {
      const { app, namespace = "argocd" } = args;
      const cmd = `kubectl get application ${app} -n ${namespace} -o yaml`;
      const { stdout } = await execAsync(cmd);
      return {
        content: [{ type: "text", text: stdout || "ArgoCD application not found" }]
      };
    }
  • The tool definition object in the 'tools' array, which serves as both registration (listed for ListToolsRequest) and schema (defines inputSchema with required 'app' parameter and optional 'namespace'). This is used by the MCP server to advertise and validate tool calls.
    {
      name: "argocd-app-status",
      description: "Get the status of an ArgoCD application",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          app: { 
            type: "string",
            description: "The name of the ArgoCD application"
          },
          namespace: { 
            type: "string",
            description: "The namespace of the application (optional, defaults to argocd namespace)"
          }
        },
        required: ["app"]
      }
    },
  • server.js:1392-1394 (registration)
    The request handler for ListToolsRequestSchema that returns the entire 'tools' array, effectively registering all tools including 'argocd-app-status' for discovery by MCP clients.
    server.setRequestHandler(ListToolsRequestSchema, async () => {
      return { tools };
    });
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states what the tool does ('Get the status') without describing what 'status' includes, whether it's a read-only operation, potential error conditions, authentication requirements, rate limits, or output format. This leaves significant behavioral gaps for a tool that presumably queries application state.

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, efficient sentence that communicates the core purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a simple query tool and front-loads the essential information ('Get the status of an ArgoCD application').

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what 'status' means in the ArgoCD context, what information is returned, or how to interpret the results. Given the complexity of ArgoCD applications and the lack of structured output documentation, users need more context to use this tool effectively.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with both parameters clearly documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any meaningful parameter semantics beyond what's already in the schema - it doesn't explain what constitutes a valid application name, namespace conventions, or provide examples. The baseline of 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 description clearly states the action ('Get the status') and target resource ('ArgoCD application'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'argocd-list-apps' or 'describe-deployment', but the specificity of 'ArgoCD application' provides some implicit distinction.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention when this tool is appropriate compared to general Kubernetes status tools or other ArgoCD-related tools in the sibling list, nor does it specify any prerequisites or contextual constraints for its use.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/thekaranpargaie/kube-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server