KubeCraft MCP Server

Get Pod Logs

get_pod_logs

Fetch logs from Kubernetes pods by specifying name, namespace, container, and line count. Supports multi-container pods and previous instance logs.

Instructions

Fetch logs for a specific pod/container.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "get_pod_logs"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	Pod name
`previous`	No	Fetch logs from the previous container instance
`container`	No	Container name (optional, required for multi-container pods)
`namespace`	No	Namespace (default: 'default')	default
`tail_lines`	No	Number of lines from the end (default: 100)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 13, 2026

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 does not disclose important behavioral traits such as output format, streaming behavior, or authentication requirements. It simply states the action without elaborating on side effects or limitations.

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 very short and to the point, making it easily scannable. It front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary details, though it could be slightly more informative without being verbose.

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 absence of output schema and annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It fails to explain return value structure, pagination, or whether logs are streamed or retrieved as a block. For a logs tool, these are critical details.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('Fetch logs') and the resource ('a specific pod/container'), making the tool's purpose immediately obvious. It differentiates from sibling tools since no other tool in the list explicitly fetches logs.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like diagnose_pod or list_pods. The description lacks context about prerequisites or typical use cases.

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

Deploy Server