aws-sso-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

search_accounts

Finds AWS accounts in the cached directory by exact name, name substring, or account ID so you can target the right account in queries.

Instructions

Search the cached account directory by exact name, substring, or account id.

The cache is refreshed automatically per org if it is missing or older than
the configured TTL. ``name_contains`` is a case-insensitive substring and
behaves identically to the ``name_contains`` selector on ``aws_query``, so
what you find here is exactly what a query will target.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`org`	No
`name`	No
`limit`	No
`all_orgs`	No
`account_id`	No
`name_contains`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 3, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does add real value by disclosing the cache TTL auto-refresh behavior per org. However, it omits whether the operation is read-only, how limit truncation behaves, and what happens when the cache is stale mid-search, leaving meaningful behavioral gaps.

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?

Two short paragraphs, front-loaded with the core action and matching modes, then the cache/consistency note. No filler, though the aws_query equivalence sentence is slightly verbose.

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?

An output schema exists so return values needn't be explained, and the cache behavior is covered. But for a 6-parameter tool with zero schema coverage, the missing limit/all_orgs semantics and lack of explicit read-only framing leave it only partially complete.

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?

Schema coverage is 0% across 6 parameters, so the description must compensate. It explains name_contains semantics (case-insensitive substring) and implies name/account_id/org usage, but says nothing about limit, all_orgs, or the org default, leaving half the parameters undocumented.

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 ('Search the cached account directory') and enumerates the three matching modes (exact name, substring, account id). It also distinguishes itself from aws_query by noting name_contains behaves identically, so an agent can tell what it targets, though it doesn't fully contrast the two tools' roles.

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?

The description implies this is a discovery step whose results feed aws_query, which is useful implied guidance, but it never states explicitly when to use this versus aws_query or the sibling refresh_accounts/cache_status tools. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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

Deploy Server