MCP Server Kubernetes

explain_resource

Read-only

Obtain documentation for any Kubernetes resource or field, recursively exploring nested fields with optional API version selection.

Instructions

Get documentation for a Kubernetes resource or field

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": {
      "resource": "<resource>"
    },
    "name": "explain_resource"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`resource`	Yes	Resource name or field path (e.g. 'pods' or 'pods.spec.containers')
`apiVersion`	No	API version to use (e.g. 'apps/v1')
`recursive`	No	Print the fields of fields recursively
`context`	No	Kubeconfig Context to use for the command (optional - defaults to null)
`output`	No	Output format (plaintext or plaintext-openapiv2)	plaintext

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv3.9.1Jun 18, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's addition of 'Get documentation' is consistent but adds no new behavioral insights. The tool's non-destructive nature is clear, but there is no mention of authorization requirements or data source (e.g., cluster API or bundled docs).

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 a single sentence, making it concise and front-loaded. However, it lacks structure and could benefit from a second sentence clarifying the tool's relationship to kubectl explain. The brevity sacrifices nuance.

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 complexity of Kubernetes resources, the absence of context about document format (e.g., plaintext), scope (e.g., cluster API docs), and how it differs from describe/list is a shortcoming. The description is too minimal for the tool's role among 20+ siblings.

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 coverage is 100%, with each parameter having a description. The tool description repeats 'Kubernetes resource or field', which mirrors the resource parameter's role. It adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 tool retrieves documentation for a Kubernetes resource or field, which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like kubectl_get (list/retrieve resources) and kubectl_describe (detailed info on live resources) by focusing on API documentation.

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 explain_resource versus alternatives such as kubectl_describe or list_api_resources. The description lacks explicit context for tool selection, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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