Skip to main content
Glama

Argocd Terminate Operation

argocd_terminate_operation
DestructiveIdempotent

Terminates a running Argo CD sync operation to unstick an application hanging in Running.

Instructions

Terminate the running sync operation. Use to unstick a sync hanging in Running.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
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
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

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is largely covered. The description adds the operational scenario (hung sync) but does not disclose what termination does to in-flight resources or partial sync state — useful context that annotations cannot convey.

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 short sentences, zero filler, with the action introduced first and the usage hint immediately after. Every sentence 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?

With annotations carrying the safety profile, a complete schema, and no output schema, the description covers the essentials for a straightforward terminate call. It could still note the resulting application state after termination, but nothing blocks correct invocation.

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 name, project, and app_namespace are fully documented in the schema, including the 404/403 semantics for project and the ARGOCD_APP_NAMESPACE default. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ("Terminate the running sync operation"), which is clearly distinct from siblings like argocd_sync_application, argocd_rollback_application, and argocd_wait_for_operation. It stops short of explicitly naming the closest sibling (wait_for_operation) to sharpen the distinction.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives a concrete triggering condition: "Use to unstick a sync hanging in Running." That is a clear when-to-use signal, but it names no alternatives or when-not-to-use cases (e.g., what to do with a healthy running sync).

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