Skip to main content
Glama

container_status

Check if the Kali Linux Docker container is running to verify environment availability for security testing tools.

Instructions

Check the status of the Kali Linux Docker container.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The container_status tool handler, which calls docker.getStatus() and formats the output.
    server.tool(
      "container_status",
      "Check the status of the Kali Linux Docker container.",
      {},
      async () => {
        try {
          const status = await docker.getStatus();
          return {
            content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(status, null, 2) }],
          };
        } catch (err) {
          return {
            content: [
              {
                type: "text",
                text: `Failed to get status: ${err instanceof Error ? err.message : String(err)}`,
              },
            ],
            isError: true,
          };
        }
      }
    );
  • The function registerContainerTools registers the container_status tool with the MCP server.
    export function registerContainerTools(
      server: McpServer,
      docker: DockerManager
    ) {
      server.tool(
        "container_start",
        "Start the Kali Linux Docker container. Must be called before running any commands.",
        {},
        async () => {
          try {
            const message = await docker.startContainer();
            return { content: [{ type: "text", text: message }] };
          } catch (err) {
            return {
              content: [
                {
                  type: "text",
                  text: `Failed to start container: ${err instanceof Error ? err.message : String(err)}`,
                },
              ],
              isError: true,
            };
          }
        }
      );
    
      server.tool(
        "container_stop",
        "Stop and remove the Kali Linux Docker container.",
        {},
        async () => {
          try {
            const message = await docker.stopContainer();
            return { content: [{ type: "text", text: message }] };
          } catch (err) {
            return {
              content: [
                {
                  type: "text",
                  text: `Failed to stop container: ${err instanceof Error ? err.message : String(err)}`,
                },
              ],
              isError: true,
            };
          }
        }
      );
    
      server.tool(
        "container_status",
        "Check the status of the Kali Linux Docker container.",
        {},
        async () => {
          try {
            const status = await docker.getStatus();
            return {
              content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(status, null, 2) }],
            };
          } catch (err) {
            return {
              content: [
                {
                  type: "text",
                  text: `Failed to get status: ${err instanceof Error ? err.message : String(err)}`,
                },
              ],
              isError: true,
            };
          }
        }
      );
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure but offers minimal information. It states the action is to 'check status' which implies a read-only operation, but doesn't specify what status information is returned (e.g., running/stopped, health, resource usage), whether it requires specific permissions, or any rate limits. The description doesn't contradict annotations since none exist, but provides inadequate behavioral context.

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, efficient sentence that communicates the essential purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool and front-loads the key information ('Check the status') immediately.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool has no annotations, no output schema, and operates in a context with multiple container management siblings, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what status information is returned, how to interpret results, or how this tool relates to other container operations. For a status-checking tool in a Docker management context, users need more information about the return format and typical usage patterns.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool has zero parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already fully documents the parameter situation. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters since none exist, maintaining focus on the tool's purpose. This meets the baseline expectation for zero-parameter tools.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('Check the status') and target resource ('Kali Linux Docker container'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'container_start' or 'container_stop' beyond the different verb, missing an opportunity to clarify the distinction between status checking and lifecycle management operations.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., whether the container must exist or be running), appropriate contexts for checking status, or relationships to sibling tools like 'container_start' or 'container_stop' that manage container state.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Hannes221/kali-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server