A
licenseNot graded
qualityD
maintenanceA read-only MCP server for Kubernetes that allows querying cluster information and diagnosing issues through natural language interfaces like Claude.
8
MIT
k8s-mcp-assistant
Provides read-only tools for inspecting Kubernetes cluster state, including viewing app deployment status, pod diagnostics, events, and fetching container logs with options for tail, timestamps, and previous container logs.
Click on "Deploy Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@k8s-mcp-assistantshow logs for the payment-service pod, last 50 lines"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
k8s-mcp-assistant
A read-only Kubernetes MCP (Model Context Protocol) server to help developers quickly inspect the state of their apps in a dev cluster — without giving them full kubectl access.
Built for teams where only Cloud/SRE has cluster access, but developers still need answers like:
“Why is my app in
CrashLoopBackOff?”“What do the pod events say?”
“Show me the container logs (including
--previous)”
What it does
This MCP exposes safe, read-only tools that fetch Kubernetes status and logs from a cluster using a restricted kubeconfig / ServiceAccount.
Tools
k8s.app_statusShows a high-level view of an app (deploy/pods readiness, restarts, basic diagnostics)
k8s.pod_logsFetches pod logs with practical options like
tail,since,timestamps,container, andprevious
⚠️ This project is intentionally read-only: no
apply, nodelete, noexec, no port-forward, no secret retrieval.
Related MCP server: kubernetes-mcp
Quickstart (local)
1) Clone & install
git clone https://github.com/nicolasmosquerar/k8s-mcp-assistant.git
cd k8s-mcp-assistant
npm install
npm run build
**Made with ❤️ for safer Kubernetes debugging**Available Tools
2 toolsk8s.app_statusC
dada un nombre de aplicacion, busca el estado de los pods
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| namespace | Yes | namespace del pod | |
| app | Yes | application label o pod name |
TDQS
C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool searches for pod status but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it's read-only, what format the status returns, error conditions, or any rate limits. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves.
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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with no wasted words, though it could benefit from slightly more detail given the lack of annotations.
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 annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., status format, possible values) or address behavioral aspects like error handling. For a tool with 2 required parameters and no structured output documentation, this leaves the agent with insufficient 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 schema already documents both parameters ('namespace' and 'app'). The description mentions 'nombre de aplicacion' (application name) which aligns with the 'app' parameter but doesn't add meaningful semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.
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's purpose: 'busca el estado de los pods' (searches for pod status) given an application name. It specifies both the action (search) and resource (pod status), though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'k8s.pod_logs' which likely retrieves logs rather than status.
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. It doesn't mention the sibling tool 'k8s.pod_logs' or any other context for choosing between them, leaving the agent without explicit usage instructions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
k8s.pod_logsB
Obtiene los logs de un pod específico en Kubernetes. Útil para debugging y troubleshooting.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| namespace | Yes | namespace del pod | |
| podName | Yes | nombre exacto del pod | |
| tail | No | número de líneas desde el final (default: 100) | |
| previous | No | ver logs del contenedor anterior (crashed) | |
| container | No | nombre del contenedor específico (si tiene múltiples) | |
| since | No | logs desde hace X tiempo (e.g., '5m', '1h', '2d') | |
| timestamps | No | incluir timestamps en los logs |
TDQS
B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. While it mentions the tool is useful for debugging/troubleshooting, it doesn't disclose important behavioral traits like authentication requirements, rate limits, whether it's read-only or destructive, or what format/logs are returned. For a log retrieval tool with no annotation coverage, this is insufficient.
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 appropriately concise with two sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second provides usage context. There's no unnecessary verbosity, though it could be slightly more structured.
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's complexity (7 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (log format, structure), doesn't mention authentication or permission requirements, and provides minimal behavioral context. For a Kubernetes log retrieval tool, this leaves significant gaps.
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?
The schema description coverage is 100%, so all parameters are documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema. According to guidelines, when schema coverage is high (>80%), the baseline score is 3 even without parameter info in the description.
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's purpose: 'Obtiene los logs de un pod específico en Kubernetes' (Gets the logs of a specific pod in Kubernetes). It specifies the verb ('obtiene' - gets) and resource ('logs de un pod'), but doesn't distinguish it from the sibling tool 'k8s.app_status' which likely serves a different purpose.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides some usage context with 'Útil para debugging y troubleshooting' (Useful for debugging and troubleshooting), which implies when to use it. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention alternatives like the sibling tool 'k8s.app_status' for different monitoring needs.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
2 tool updates
v1.0.0- First observed
k8s.app_status - First observed
k8s.pod_logs
TDQS
B3.1/5.0
Scored across 2 tools
Disambiguation5/5
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one checks pod status for an application, while the other retrieves logs for a specific pod. There is no overlap or ambiguity between these functions, making it easy for an agent to select the correct tool.
Naming Consistency5/5
Both tools follow a consistent naming pattern using 'k8s.' prefix and snake_case (app_status, pod_logs). This uniformity enhances readability and predictability across the tool set.
Tool Count2/5
With only two tools, the server feels thin for a Kubernetes assistant domain, which typically involves more operations like scaling, deployment, or resource management. This limited scope may hinder agent workflows.
Completeness2/5
The tool set is severely incomplete for Kubernetes operations, lacking essential CRUD actions such as creating, updating, or deleting resources. Agents will face significant gaps when trying to perform common tasks in this domain.
Maintenance
ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues
Related MCP Connectors
Read-only MCP server for AIStatusDashboard status, incidents, metrics, and fallback recommendations.
Provides read access to your GKE and Kubernetes resources.
The Google GKE MCP server is a managed Model Context Protocol server that provides AI applications with tools to manage Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE) clusters and Kubernetes resources. It exposes a structured, discoverable interface that allows AI agents to interact with GKE and Kubernetes APIs, enabling them to inspect cluster configurations, retrieve Kubernetes resource YAMLs, monitor operations like cluster upgrades, diagnose issues, and optimize costs—all without needing to parse text output or use complex kubectl commands.
The Cortex MCP server provides read-only access to real-time engineering context from the Cortex developer portal, allowing AI coding assistants to answer natural language questions about your organization's catalog (microservices, libraries, domains, teams, infrastructure), scorecards (engineering standards and best practices), initiatives (goals and deadlines), and Engineering Intelligence metrics. It includes tools for querying documentation, tracking personal entities, and accessing AI-assisted insights across the entire Cortex ecosystem.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that provides safe, read-only access to Kubernetes resources for debugging and inspection. Built with security in mind, it offers comprehensive cluster visibility without modification capabilities.43MIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceProvides a set of read-only Kubernetes functions via an MCP server, enabling interaction with Kubernetes clusters through agents or coding assistants like GitHub Copilot.93Apache 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceRead-only MCP server for safe Kubernetes inspection, diagnosis, and debugging. Supports Kubernetes core, Helm, Argo Workflows, and Argo CD.2191 npm5MIT