Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
KubeCraft MCP Server

KubeCraft MCP Server

by cloudcrafttech
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

List Pods

list_pods

Retrieve a list of pods in a Kubernetes namespace, showing status, restarts, age, and container images.

Instructions

List pods in a namespace with status, restarts, age, and container images.

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_pods"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
namespaceNoKubernetes namespace (default: 'default')default
label_selectorNoOptional label selector (e.g. 'app=nginx')

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It implies read-only behavior via 'List' but does not explicitly state idempotency, permissions, or error handling. The mention of returned fields adds some value.

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, 13 words. Front-loaded with verb and resource, no filler. Extremely concise and efficient.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains the returned fields. It could mention that the tool is for Kubernetes, but the sibling context makes that clear. Overall, complete enough.

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. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, yielding a baseline score.

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 ('List') and the resource ('pods'), and specifies the output fields ('status, restarts, age, and container images'). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like list_deployments or list_services by focusing on pods.

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 (e.g., diagnose_pod, describe_resource). No when-to-use or when-not-to-use context is given.

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