mcp-podman-crunchtools

by crunchtools

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

Volume List Tool

volume_list_tool

Read-only

Lists Podman volumes and supports filtering by key/value pairs, helping you inspect storage available to containers.

Instructions

List volumes.

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": "volume_list_tool"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`filters`	No	Filter by key/value pairs

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.2Aug 1, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation. Beyond that, the description adds no behavioral context about filtering behavior, pagination, output format, or scope, so it does little more than repeat the tool name.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is only two words, so it contains no wasted language. However, it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise, and it lacks front-loaded guidance about scope or filtering.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, annotations declare read-only behavior, and the filter parameter is fully documented in the schema, so the definition is minimally usable. Still, the description is too bare for an agent to confidently distinguish this from volume_inspect_tool or understand listing scope.

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%, and the single filter parameter is already documented as 'Filter by key/value pairs'. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable at the baseline when schema coverage is high.

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 states a specific verb and resource: listing volumes. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not distinguish this list operation from sibling tools such as volume_inspect_tool or other list tools.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention volume_inspect_tool or explain when filtering is appropriate, so the agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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