mcp-podman-crunchtools

by crunchtools

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

Container Create Tool

container_create_tool

Create a new container from an image, with optional environment variables, volumes, labels, and command.

Instructions

Create a new 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": {
      "image": "<image>"
    },
    "name": "container_create_tool"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`env`	No	Environment variables
`name`	No	Container name
`image`	Yes	Container image (e.g. "registry.access.redhat.com/ubi9/ubi:latest")
`labels`	No	Container labels
`command`	No	Command to run
`volumes`	No	Volume mounts (format: "host_path:container_path[:options]")

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.2Aug 1, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not state that this is a mutating/persistent operation, whether the container starts automatically, permission requirements, or error behavior. For a create tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero waste. It is appropriately sized, though under-specified content is a content problem rather than a conciseness flaw.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. But with no annotations and a one-line description, the definition is inadequate for a mutation tool: no safety profile, no start-on-create semantics, no prerequisites, and no sibling routing.

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 all six parameters with descriptions and examples (e.g., the image example, volume mount format). The description adds nothing beyond the schema, which is the baseline 3 case when the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a clear verb+resource ('Create a new container'), which distinguishes it from sibling read tools like container_list_tool or container_inspect_tool. However, it adds no differentiation from pod_create_tool or any specifics about what container is created or its scope.

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 when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternatives mentioned. An agent must infer that this is the creation path rather than one of the many lifecycle siblings, with no explicit routing guidance.

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