@gnaws/mcp

Dump Resources

dump

Export scanned or loaded AWS resource data from memory to a local directory, enabling offline analysis and later reloading for review.

Instructions

Dump loaded resources to a directory for offline use. Requires 'scan' or 'load' to be called first. The output can later be used with 'load' for offline analysis.

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": "dump"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`path`	No	Output directory path. Defaults to 'dump'.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It clarifies that the tool writes to a directory, requires a prerequisite step, and produces output consumable by 'load'. While it doesn't detail disk space or error handling, the core behavioral traits are well-covered.

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 two sentences, front-loads the core action, and includes essential usage context. Every sentence serves a purpose with no wasted words.

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?

Given low complexity (1 optional param, no nested objects, no output schema) and no annotations, the description is complete. It explains prerequisites, output usage, and default behavior, leaving no major gaps for an agent to misunderstand.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that 'path' is the output directory path with a default of 'dump', which is not fully detailed in the schema's description. The schema says 'Output directory path. Defaults to 'dump'.' which is already clear, so the description doesn't add much extra meaning beyond the schema, but the schema itself is already good.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: to dump loaded resources to a directory for offline use. It uses a specific verb 'dump' and resource 'loaded resources', and distinguishes itself from siblings by referencing 'scan' or 'load' as prerequisites.

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?

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool: after 'scan' or 'load' has been called. It also explains the downstream use case ('offline analysis' with 'load'), effectively preventing misuse and clarifying the workflow.

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

Deploy Server