Google GKE

list_clusters

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists GKE clusters in a given project and location. Location can be a region, zone, or '-' for all locations.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`parent`	Yes	Required. The parent (project and location) where the clusters will be listed. Specified in the format `projects//locations/`. Location "-" matches all zones and all regions.
`readMask`	No	Optional. The field mask to specify the fields to be returned in the response. Use a single "*" to get all fields. Default: clusters.autopilot,clusters.createTime,clusters.currentMasterVersion,clusters.currentNodeCount,clusters.currentNodeVersion,clusters.description,clusters.endpoint,clusters.fleet,clusters.location,clusters.name,clusters.network,clusters.nodePools.name,clusters.releaseChannel,clusters.resourceLabels,clusters.selfLink,clusters.status,clusters.statusMessage,clusters.subnetwork,missingZones.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`errors`	No	Errors encountered during cluster listing.
`clusters`	No	A string representing the ListClustersResponse object.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the description adds no additional behavioral context. The location semantics are already present in the schema's parent parameter description, so repeating them provides no extra value. The description does not mention pagination, response size, or other operational details.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then adds essential scope information about location. There is no wasted text or redundancy.

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?

For a simple read-only list tool with rich annotations and an output schema, the description adequately covers the core purpose and location flexibility. It lacks explicit guidance on alternatives, but overall it is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 detailed descriptions for both parent and readMask. The description itself adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 specific action 'Lists GKE clusters' with scope 'in a given project and location', and further clarifies location semantics including '-' for all locations. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_cluster (single cluster) and list_node_pools (node pools).

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?

The description implies when to use: to list GKE clusters in a project/location, and explains the required parent/location format. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, such as using get_cluster for a single cluster.

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

All Google GKE tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target distinct actions and resources, but a few pairs could confuse agents, such as get_cluster (GKE cluster details) vs get_k8s_cluster_info (kubectl cluster-info), or apply_k8s_manifest vs patch_k8s_resource. Overall, descriptions help clarify the differences.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in lowercase snake_case (e.g., create_cluster, list_node_pools, get_k8s_logs). There are no mixed conventions or unpredictable naming variations.

Tool Count4/5

With 23 tools, the server covers both GKE cluster management and in-cluster Kubernetes operations, which justifies the count. It is slightly on the heavier side but remains within a reasonable scope for such a broad domain.

Completeness3/5

The tool surface covers create, read, update, and list operations for clusters and node pools, but notably lacks delete_cluster and delete_node_pool. This leaves an obvious lifecycle gap that agents cannot work around without additional tooling.

Resources

Need Help?