Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Code Gym AWS Emulator MCP

Code Gym AWS Emulator MCP

by B11-Health
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

emulator_doctor

Read-onlyIdempotent

Diagnose local install, CA, credentials, TLS, and STS issues in the AWS emulator and apply safe fixes so your sandbox runs correctly.

Instructions

Diagnose local install, CA, credentials, TLS, and STS with safe fixes

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "emulator_doctor"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0-beta.1

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is supposedly covered — yet the phrase 'with safe fixes' implies the tool may apply changes. That ambiguity is exactly the kind of behavioral detail the description should resolve, and it instead introduces doubt.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single compact clause with zero filler, front-loaded with the verb. It reads as a title fragment rather than a sentence, but nothing is wasted.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With no parameters, no output schema, and rich annotations, the description covers the surface area adequately. However, for a diagnostic tool it never indicates what the caller gets back or whether 'fixes' alter local state, which is the main thing an agent needs to decide before invoking it.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate beyond what the empty schema already conveys. Baseline of 4 applies.

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 verb 'Diagnose' plus an enumerated resource list (local install, CA, credentials, TLS, STS) tells an agent exactly what domain is checked. It stops short of distinguishing itself from nearby diagnostics such as emulator_health or emulator_self_test, leaving overlap unresolved.

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?

There is no statement of when to run this versus the other emulator_* tools, no prerequisites, and no conditions under which it should be avoided. The only usage signal is the implicit 'something looks broken' framing of the word 'Diagnose'.

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