Skip to main content
Glama

list-networkpolicies

List Kubernetes network policies to manage network traffic rules and security controls within a namespace.

Instructions

List Kubernetes network policies in a namespace

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
namespaceNoThe namespace to list network policies from (optional, defaults to current context namespace)

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function that executes the tool logic by running kubectl get networkpolicies command with optional namespace flag.
    case "list-networkpolicies": {
      const { namespace } = args || {};
      const nsArg = namespace ? `-n ${namespace}` : "";
      const cmd = `kubectl get networkpolicies ${nsArg} -o wide`;
      const { stdout } = await execAsync(cmd);
      return {
        content: [{ type: "text", text: stdout || "No network policies found" }]
      };
    }
  • Input schema definition for the list-networkpolicies tool, defining optional namespace parameter.
    name: "list-networkpolicies",
    description: "List Kubernetes network policies in a namespace",
    inputSchema: {
      type: "object",
      properties: {
        namespace: { 
          type: "string",
          description: "The namespace to list network policies from (optional, defaults to current context namespace)"
        }
      }
    }
  • server.js:1392-1394 (registration)
    Tool registration via the ListToolsRequestHandler that returns the tools array containing list-networkpolicies.
    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 the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('List') but does not describe traits like whether it requires read permissions, returns a filtered or full list, includes pagination, or handles errors. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior beyond the basic action.

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 that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it efficient and easy to parse, with no wasted 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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool that interacts with Kubernetes resources. It does not cover behavioral aspects like permissions, error handling, or output format, which are critical for an agent to use the tool correctly in a cluster environment, leaving significant contextual gaps.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the parameter 'namespace' documented as optional and defaulting to the current context. The description does not add any meaning beyond this, such as explaining namespace constraints or listing behavior without a namespace. Given the high schema coverage, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema handles the parameter documentation adequately.

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 ('List') and resource ('Kubernetes network policies in a namespace'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'list-all' or 'list-pods', which would require mentioning the specific resource type or scope to achieve a perfect score.

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 does not mention sibling tools like 'list-all' (which might list all resources) or 'describe-networkpolicy' (if it existed), nor does it specify prerequisites such as needing cluster access or namespace permissions, leaving usage context unclear.

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