omv-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

docker_prune

Destructive

Remove stopped containers, dangling images, unused networks, and build cache to reclaim disk space. Requires confirmation; can also delete anonymous volumes when enabled.

Instructions

Reclaim space by removing stopped containers, dangling images, unused networks and build cache (docker system prune -f). Set volumes=True to also drop anonymous volumes (DELETES their data). Requires confirm=True.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "docker_prune"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`confirm`	No
`volumes`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.1Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, and the description adds critical behavioral details: the command is equivalent to `docker system prune -f`, the volumes=True flag deletes anonymous volume data (explicit 'DELETES their data'), and confirm=True is mandatory. This goes beyond the annotation without contradicting it.

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 achieve high density: the first states the core function and scope, the second covers the critical options and their consequences. No filler or unnecessary detail.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a destructive tool with two flags and no output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: what is removed, what each flag does, and the required confirmation. No critical missing information for an agent to select and correctly invoke the tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema has 0% description coverage, but the description fully explains both parameters: confirm (required, acts as a safety gate) and volumes (drops anonymous volumes, with a data-loss warning). This completely compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 clearly states the action ('Reclaim space') and the exact resources affected ('stopped containers, dangling images, unused networks and build cache'), which is specific and distinguishes this from sibling tools like docker_system_df (disk usage). The title 'Prune unused Docker data' reinforces the purpose.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on the required confirm flag and the optional volumes flag, including the data-loss warning. It does not explicitly mention when not to use the tool or point to a safer alternative for checking disk usage, but the context is clear enough for an agent.

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