Skip to main content
Glama

debug-pod

Create a debug container in a Kubernetes pod to diagnose issues and troubleshoot problems within the pod's environment.

Instructions

Create a debug container in a pod

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
podYesThe name of the pod to debug
namespaceNoThe namespace of the pod (optional, defaults to current context namespace)
imageNoThe debug container image to use (optional, defaults to busybox)

Implementation Reference

  • Handler for the 'debug-pod' tool. It destructures arguments, constructs a kubectl debug command with optional namespace and image, executes it using execAsync, and returns the stdout or a success message.
    case "debug-pod": {
      const { pod, namespace, image = "busybox" } = args;
      const nsArg = namespace ? `-n ${namespace}` : "";
      const cmd = `kubectl debug ${pod} ${nsArg} --image=${image} --share-processes --copy-to=${pod}-debug`;
      const { stdout } = await execAsync(cmd);
      return {
        content: [{ 
          type: "text", 
          text: stdout || `Debug pod created for ${pod}` 
        }]
      };
    }
  • Input schema definition for the 'debug-pod' tool, specifying parameters: pod (required string), namespace (optional string), image (optional string with default busybox).
    {
      name: "debug-pod",
      description: "Create a debug container in a pod",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          pod: { 
            type: "string",
            description: "The name of the pod to debug"
          },
          namespace: { 
            type: "string",
            description: "The namespace of the pod (optional, defaults to current context namespace)"
          },
          image: { 
            type: "string",
            description: "The debug container image to use (optional, defaults to busybox)"
          }
        },
        required: ["pod"]
      }
    },
  • server.js:1392-1394 (registration)
    Registration of the tool list handler which returns the array containing the 'debug-pod' tool definition when ListToolsRequest is called.
    server.setRequestHandler(ListToolsRequestSchema, async () => {
      return { tools };
    });
  • server.js:7-7 (helper)
    Helper function execAsync used by all tool handlers, including 'debug-pod', to execute kubectl commands asynchronously.
    const execAsync = promisify(exec);
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Create a debug container' implies a mutation/write operation, but the description doesn't specify required permissions, whether this is destructive to the pod, what happens to the debug container after use, or any rate limits. This leaves significant behavioral gaps for a tool that modifies pod state.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'debug container' means operationally, what capabilities it provides, how it differs from regular containers, or what the expected outcome/response looks like. The context signals indicate this is a non-trivial tool (3 parameters, 1 required) that needs more complete documentation.

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 three parameters with their purposes and optionality. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, maintaining the baseline score for high schema coverage.

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 clearly states the action ('Create a debug container') and target resource ('in a pod'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'create-ephemeral-container' or 'exec', which might have overlapping functionality for debugging purposes.

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. There's no mention of prerequisites, when this approach is preferred over other debugging methods, or what distinguishes it from similar tools like 'exec' or 'create-ephemeral-container' in the sibling list.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/thekaranpargaie/kube-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server