Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
KubeCraft MCP Server

KubeCraft MCP Server

by cloudcrafttech
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Get Node Health

get_node_health

Retrieve Kubernetes node health conditions, showing unhealthy nodes first with remediation hints to diagnose and fix issues.

Instructions

Structured node conditions (Ready, memory/disk/PID/network pressure) with unhealthy nodes first and short remediation hints. Read-only.

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": "get_node_health"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Discloses key behaviors: returns structured conditions, orders unhealthy first, includes remediation hints, and is read-only. Without annotations, this is good transparency. Mild ambiguity about whether it applies to all nodes or a specific node.

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 packed with useful information: conditions type, order, hints, and safety. No wasted words.

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?

Description adequately covers purpose and key features. Lacks explicit statement of whether it covers all nodes or a specific node, but for a zero-parameter tool, it is reasonably complete.

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

Parameters5/5

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

No parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. Description adds no parameter info, but none is needed. Baseline 4 justified by high coverage; no issues.

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?

Clearly states it returns structured node conditions (Ready, memory/disk/PID/network pressure) with unhealthy nodes first and short remediation hints. Distinguishes from sibling tools like list_nodes which likely only list nodes without detailed health.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Implies it's for diagnosing node health, but does not explicitly say when to use vs. alternatives (e.g., list_nodes). Lack of explicit when-not or alternative references, but context is clear enough.

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