Skip to main content
Glama
Brucedh

AWS‑IReveal‑MCP

accessanalyzer_list_analyzers

List all IAM Access Analyzer analyzers in a specified AWS region to identify and manage access policies.

Instructions

List all IAM Access Analyzer analyzers in the specified region.

Parameters:
    aws_region (str): The AWS region - use 'us-east-1' if not specified.

Returns:
    str: JSON-formatted list of analyzers.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
aws_regionYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • The @mcp.tool() decorator registers this async handler function, which implements the 'accessanalyzer_list_analyzers' tool by listing IAM Access Analyzer analyzers in the specified AWS region using boto3 and returning their JSON representation.
    @mcp.tool()
    async def accessanalyzer_list_analyzers(aws_region: str) -> str:
        """
        List all IAM Access Analyzer analyzers in the specified region.
    
        Parameters:
            aws_region (str): The AWS region - use 'us-east-1' if not specified.
    
        Returns:
            str: JSON-formatted list of analyzers.
        """
        client = boto3.client('accessanalyzer', region_name=aws_region)
        response = client.list_analyzers()
        analyzers = response.get('analyzers', [])
        return json.dumps(analyzers, indent=2, cls=DateTimeEncoder)
  • server.py:932-932 (registration)
    The @mcp.tool() decorator registers the 'accessanalyzer_list_analyzers' tool with the MCP server, using the function name as the tool name.
    @mcp.tool()
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral context. It mentions the return format ('JSON-formatted list'), but lacks details on permissions required, rate limits, pagination, error handling, or what constitutes an 'analyzer' in this context. This is inadequate for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 highly concise and well-structured, with three clear sections (purpose, parameters, returns) in just three sentences. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given the simple input schema (1 parameter) and presence of an output schema (implied by 'Returns' statement), the description is moderately complete. However, with no annotations and minimal behavioral context, it falls short of fully preparing an agent for effective use, especially regarding operational constraints.

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 description adds meaningful context for the single parameter by specifying a default value ('use 'us-east-1' if not specified'), which isn't in the schema (0% coverage). However, it doesn't explain the parameter's role beyond 'AWS region' or validate region formats, leaving some gaps in understanding.

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 action ('List all IAM Access Analyzer analyzers') and resource ('in the specified region'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'accessanalyzer_list_findings' or 'guardduty_list_detectors', which prevents 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 doesn't mention sibling tools like 'accessanalyzer_get_analyzer' for detailed views or 'accessanalyzer_list_findings' for related data, nor does it specify prerequisites or exclusions for usage.

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/Brucedh/aws-ireveal-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server