Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
k8scortex-mcp

k8scortex-mcp

by apatilgtn
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

list_node_pools

List node pools in a Kubernetes cluster, grouping nodes by cloud provider (AKS/EKS/GKE) labels and reporting each pool's health status.

Instructions

Groups nodes by managed-cloud node pool labels (AKS/EKS/GKE) and reports pool health.

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": "list_node_pools"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
clusterNoTarget cluster name (default: 'default')

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.2

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states 'reports pool health' implying a read operation, but does not explicitly confirm it's non-destructive or disclose any behavioral traits beyond that.

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 sentence succinctly conveys the tool's core function with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the main action.

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 listing tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers the basic purpose but lacks details on output format or usage context.

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%, so the single parameter 'cluster' is already well-documented in the schema. The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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?

Description clearly states the tool groups nodes by managed-cloud node pool labels and reports pool health. It specifies the resource (node pools) and action (groups, reports), and distinguishes from siblings like list_nodes by targeting pool-level grouping.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like list_nodes or get_node_pool_detail. The description implies it's for pool-level health but does not provide exclusions or context.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools