execCommandExecute a one-off shell command inside a running container using Kubernetes exec, enabling direct command execution for debugging or operational tasks.
Run a one-off shell command in a running container (kubernetes exec)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| env | No | ||
| region | No | ||
| appSlug | Yes | ||
| requestBody | No | The JSON request body. | |
| workspaceSlug | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.5.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, covering the mutation risk. The description adds that it is a 'one-off' command (not a persistent session), which is useful context. It does not elaborate on side effects, authentication, or failure behavior, but annotations carry the safety burden.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single, front-loaded sentence with no waste. It immediately conveys the action and scope, earning its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a tool with a nested requestBody, five parameters, and no output schema, the description is grossly incomplete. It does not explain the required fields (component and command), the meaning of env or region, or how the command is executed. An agent would need to inspect the schema or make assumptions, risking incorrect invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is only 20% (only requestBody has a description). The description does not explain any of the five parameters (env, region, appSlug, workspaceSlug, or the nested requestBody fields). It fails to compensate for the low coverage, leaving the agent to guess parameter meanings.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'Run', the resource 'shell command', and the context 'in a running container (kubernetes exec)'. It is specific and distinguishes itself from sibling tools that handle deployments, logs, or git operations.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies the tool is for one-off shell commands in containers, which is a clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use alternatives or exclude other tools, though the unique phrasing 'kubernetes exec' sets it apart sufficiently.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.