Skip to main content
Glama

describe-pod

Retrieve detailed information about a specific Kubernetes pod, including its configuration, status, and resource specifications.

Instructions

Describe details of a Kubernetes pod

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
podYesThe name of the pod to describe
namespaceNoThe namespace of the pod (optional, defaults to current context namespace)

Implementation Reference

  • Handler that runs `kubectl describe pod <pod> [-n <namespace>]` to retrieve detailed pod information and returns the output.
    case "describe-pod": {
      const { pod, namespace } = args;
      const nsArg = namespace ? `-n ${namespace}` : "";
      const cmd = `kubectl describe pod ${pod} ${nsArg}`;
      const { stdout } = await execAsync(cmd);
      return {
        content: [{ type: "text", text: stdout || "No pod details found" }]
      };
    }
  • Tool schema defining input parameters: required 'pod' name and optional 'namespace'.
      name: "describe-pod",
      description: "Describe details of a Kubernetes pod",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          pod: { 
            type: "string",
            description: "The name of the pod to describe"
          },
          namespace: { 
            type: "string",
            description: "The namespace of the pod (optional, defaults to current context namespace)"
          }
        },
        required: ["pod"]
      }
    },
  • server.js:1392-1394 (registration)
    Registration of all tools list including 'describe-pod' via ListToolsRequestSchema handler, which returns the static tools array.
    server.setRequestHandler(ListToolsRequestSchema, async () => {
      return { tools };
    });
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('describe details') but doesn't disclose critical traits: whether this is a read-only operation, what details are included (e.g., status, events, specs), if it requires specific permissions, or how errors are handled. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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, clear sentence with zero waste—it directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly. Every part of the sentence earns its place by conveying essential information.

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 operations and lack of annotations or output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'details' are returned (e.g., pod status, configuration, events), potential side effects, or error conditions. For a tool that likely provides rich output, this leaves the agent without enough context to use it effectively beyond basic invocation.

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%, with both parameters ('pod' and 'namespace') fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as examples of pod names or namespace contexts. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the description doesn't compensate but also doesn't detract.

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 verb ('describe') and resource ('details of a Kubernetes pod'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'list-pods' or 'get-pod-metrics' by focusing on detailed description rather than listing or metrics. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from similar 'describe-*' tools (e.g., 'describe-deployment', 'describe-service'), which slightly limits specificity.

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. It doesn't mention when to choose 'describe-pod' over 'get-pod-metrics', 'debug-pod', or other 'describe-*' tools for different resources, nor does it specify prerequisites like needing pod access or context setup. Usage is implied only by the tool name and description.

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