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

Code Gym AWS Emulator MCP

by B11-Health
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

sqs_list_queues

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves the names of all emulated SQS queues in your local sandbox so you can inspect available queues without an AWS account.

Instructions

List emulated SQS queue names

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": "sqs_list_queues"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0-beta.1

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds that only queue names are returned (not URLs, ARNs, or attributes) and that the source is the emulator, which is useful but minimal beyond the structured data.

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?

A single four-word phrase with the resource front-loaded and zero filler. Nothing could be removed without losing scope information.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a parameterless, read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description of what comes back (queue names) is sufficient to call and consume the result. A note on whether an empty list is possible or on result ordering would be the only remaining nicety.

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 no parameter semantics to explain; the schema is empty and closed. Baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List ... SQS queue names") and the word "emulated" scopes it to the emulator rather than real AWS. It is clearly distinct from siblings like sqs_create_queue or sqs_receive_messages, though it never names them explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied by the verb "List" — an agent can infer this is the enumeration step before create/delete/receive operations, but the description gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance and no prerequisites.

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