Skip to main content
Glama
yunusemregul

dynatrace-bridge-mcp

by yunusemregul
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

list_pods

List Kubernetes pods for a workload or by name, showing phase, node, IPs, restarts, age, CPU/memory limits, and containers. Use it to inspect pod state before checking events or runtime metrics.

Instructions

Lists Kubernetes pods (Dynatrace entity type CLOUD_APPLICATION_INSTANCE) of a workload, or pods matching a name, with phase, node, IPs, restart count, age, CPU / memory requests and limits, and the containers in each pod with their ids.

Pass workload (id or name, from list_workloads) and/or name (substring of the pod name). Follow up with pod_resources for usage over time, pod_events for Kubernetes events, or process_runtime with a pod id for JVM / Node.js metrics.

This tool runs through the Dynatrace Bridge browser extension in the user's logged-in browser. If it fails, report the error to the user; do not try to open browser tabs or use browser automation instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoCase-insensitive substring of the pod name. Can be combined with `workload`.
limitNoMaximum number of pods to print. Default 50, at most 200. The output says how many were omitted.
time_toNoAbsolute end time, ISO 8601; without a zone it is read as UTC. Without time_from, the window starts minutes_lookback before this. Must not be in the future.
workloadNoThe workload whose pods to list, as an entity id (CLOUD_APPLICATION-1234567890ABCDEF) or a name. A name that matches several entities returns the candidates instead of guessing.
time_fromNoAbsolute start time, ISO 8601 (e.g. '2026-09-23T10:28:00Z'). A timestamp without a zone (Z or ±hh:mm) is read as UTC. Without time_to, the window runs from here to now. Must not be in the future.
environmentNoWhich Dynatrace environment to query, as named in the Dynatrace Bridge extension popup. Omit it for the default, the first environment configured there. The names are not listed here because the extension had not connected yet when this description was built; `dynatrace_bridge_status` lists them.
minutes_lookbackNoWindow length in minutes. Default 120. With neither time_from nor time_to it means the last N minutes up to now; with only time_to it means the N minutes ending at time_to; ignored when time_from is given. The response header always shows the resolved absolute UTC window.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose a non-obvious execution trait: it runs through the Dynatrace Bridge browser extension in the user's logged-in browser, plus explicit failure handling ('report the error to the user; do not try to open browser tabs'). It doesn't discuss pagination/truncation semantics beyond what the schema says, which keeps it below a 5.

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?

Three tight sentences front-load what is returned, then route to follow-ups, then cover the browser-extension execution caveat. No filler, and the most important information (the resource and its fields) comes first.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a 7-parameter, zero-required listing tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the resource, the returned fields, the parameter interplay, the sibling alternatives, and the unusual browser-extension runtime. An agent has everything needed to select and invoke it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description rises above it by adding parameter relationships and provenance the schema does not state — notably that `workload` and `name` can be combined, and that `workload` ids/names come from `list_workloads`. It still leaves the time-window parameters entirely to the schema.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (lists Kubernetes pods) and enumerates the exact payload returned: phase, node, IPs, restart count, age, CPU/memory requests and limits, and containers with ids. It also anchors the concept to the Dynatrace entity type CLOUD_APPLICATION_INSTANCE, which sharply separates it from siblings like list_workloads or list_services.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly tells the agent how to drive it ('Pass `workload` ... and/or `name`') and where the workload id comes from, then names three concrete follow-ups (pod_resources, pod_events, process_runtime) for adjacent needs. That is real routing guidance rather than implied usage.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools