TrueNAS MCP

Delete App

delete_app

Delete an installed app from TrueNAS with a default preview mode to confirm before removal, and optionally remove the app's container images.

Instructions

Delete an installed app.

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_name": "<app_name>"
    },
    "name": "delete_app"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`dry_run`	No	Preview only (default True); set False to delete.
`app_name`	Yes	Installed app name.
`remove_images`	No	Also remove the app's container images.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Oct 23, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

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. For a destructive deletion it says nothing about irreversibility, that dry_run defaults to True (so a naive call only previews), or that remove_images may destroy container images — all critical context an agent needs before invoking.

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?

A single front-loaded clause with zero filler, but it is arguably too terse for a destructive operation — concision here borders on under-specification rather than genuine efficiency.

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?

An output schema exists and parameters are schema-documented, but for a deletion tool with no annotations the description should warn about destructiveness and the dry_run=True default. An agent reading only the description could believe the call deletes immediately.

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%, so app_name, dry_run, and remove_images are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond this, which is acceptable at baseline 3, but it misses the chance to highlight the counterintuitive dry_run default.

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?

States a specific verb (Delete) and resource (installed app), which distinguishes it from install_app, start_app, stop_app, and update_app in the sibling list. It doesn't explicitly contrast with those siblings, but the name-plus-verb combination is unambiguous.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this versus stop_app (which stops without removing) or how it relates to uninstalling workflows. There is no mention of prerequisites, irreversibility, or the dry_run preview behavior that would tell an agent whether this is a safe operation.

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