Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
k8s-pilot

k8s-pilot

by bourbonkk
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

pv_create

Create a PersistentVolume in a Kubernetes cluster by specifying name, capacity, access modes, storage class, and host path.

Instructions

Create a PersistentVolume in the cluster.

Args: context_name: The Kubernetes context name name: The PersistentVolume name capacity: The storage capacity (e.g., "10Gi") access_modes: List of access modes (e.g., ["ReadWriteOnce"]) storage_class: The storage class name host_path: The host path for the volume

Returns: Status of the creation operation

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": {
      "context_name": "<context_name>",
      "name": "<name>",
      "capacity": "<capacity>",
      "access_modes": "<access_modes>",
      "storage_class": "<storage_class>",
      "host_path": "<host_path>"
    },
    "name": "pv_create"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
capacityYes
host_pathYes
access_modesYes
context_nameYes
storage_classYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv2.0.0
  2. Removedv2.0.0
  3. First observed

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
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. While it states this is a creation operation, it doesn't mention permission requirements, whether this is a mutating operation, potential side effects, error conditions, or what 'Status of the creation operation' actually means. For a Kubernetes resource creation tool, this is a significant gap in 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with clear sections (Args, Returns) and uses bullet-like formatting. Each sentence earns its place, though the 'Returns' section could be more specific. The front-loaded purpose statement is effective, making this appropriately sized for a 6-parameter tool.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the complexity of Kubernetes PersistentVolume creation, no annotations, and no output schema, the description provides basic but incomplete coverage. It documents parameters well but lacks crucial context about permissions, error handling, and what the return status actually contains. For a mutating operation in a complex system, this is minimally adequate but has clear gaps.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates well by listing all 6 parameters with brief explanations and examples. It clarifies what each parameter represents (e.g., 'capacity: The storage capacity (e.g., "10Gi")'), which adds meaningful context beyond the bare schema. The examples for 'capacity' and 'access_modes' are particularly helpful.

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 ('Create a PersistentVolume') and resource ('in the cluster'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'pv_update' or 'pvc_create' beyond the creation aspect, which prevents a perfect score.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'pvc_create' (PersistentVolumeClaim) or other volume-related operations. There's no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or when not to use this tool, leaving the agent with insufficient contextual guidance.

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