Skip to main content
Glama
vish288

mcp-argocd

by vish288
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Argocd Get Application

argocd_get_application
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve one Argo CD application's spec, sync/health, conditions, operation, and resource counts to assess status; use refresh=hard to force reconciliation.

Instructions

Get one application: spec, sync/health, conditions, operation, summary, resource counts.

refresh=hard forces reconciliation and re-fetches target manifests from the repo server.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fullNoReturn the raw API payload instead of the slim one
nameYesApplication name; accepts namespace/name for apps-in-any-namespace
projectNoProject; with it a missing app is 404 and a wrong-project app is 403
refreshNonormal reconciles against cache; hard re-fetches from the repo servernone
resourcesNoInclude status.resources filtered by this modenone
app_namespaceNoOverride appNamespace; defaults to ARGOCD_APP_NAMESPACE

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.4.0
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "result": {
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "result"
-  ],
-  "type": "object",
-  "x-fastmcp-wrap-result": true
-}New value: +null
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context that annotations cannot: refresh=hard forces reconciliation and re-fetches target manifests from the repo server, i.e. it has side effects on cache/repo despite being a read. It does not describe error behavior (404/403), which the schema covers instead.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, with the primary purpose and return shape front-loaded ahead of the refresh nuance. Every clause earns its place.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description correctly enumerates the returned fields (spec, sync/health, conditions, operation, summary, resource counts). For a 6-parameter read tool in a cluster of 40+ siblings, that is sufficient, though it omits any hint of response size or cost of the full/refresh options.

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 coverage is 100% with per-parameter descriptions and enum values, so the schema carries the load and baseline is 3. The description's refresh=hard note largely restates the schema's own wording ("hard re-fetches from the repo server"), adding only the word "reconciliation" beyond it.

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?

"Get one application" names a specific verb and resource, and the enumeration of returned facets (spec, sync/health, conditions, operation, summary, resource counts) distinguishes it from the sibling argocd_list_applications. An agent knows this is the singular, detailed read.

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?

Usage is implied by "one application" and the required name parameter, and the refresh=hard sentence hints at when to force a re-fetch. However, it never states when to prefer argocd_get_manifests, argocd_get_resource_tree, or argocd_get_application_history over this tool, nor any prerequisites.

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