k8scortex-mcp

describe_deployment

Retrieve detailed information about a Kubernetes deployment, including status and configuration, by specifying namespace and deployment name.

Instructions

Shows details of a deployment.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "namespace": "<namespace>",
      "deploymentName": "<deploymentName>"
    },
    "name": "describe_deployment"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cluster`	No	Target cluster name (default: 'default')
`namespace`	Yes	The Kubernetes namespace
`deploymentName`	Yes	The name of the deployment

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.2Jul 28, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only says 'shows details' without disclosing what details are included (e.g., status, metadata), whether it is read-only, or any other behavioral traits.

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?

Single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose without unnecessary words.

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 no output schema, the description should hint at return values. It does not. Sibling tools show many describe tools; description lacks differentiation. For a simple tool, more detail on output would be beneficial.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 tool shows details of a deployment, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_pods or describe_pod. The verb 'Shows' and resource 'deployment' provide specific purpose.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not clarify that this tool is for detailed view of a single deployment, while list_deployments would list all deployments.

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

Deploy Server