@atengk/mcp-server-s3

delete_objects_batch

Deletes up to 1,000 specified object keys in one batch from an S3-compatible bucket, enabling bulk cleanup without individual delete calls.

Instructions

批量删除指定的多个对象键列表（单批上限 1000 个对象）

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "keys": "<keys>"
    },
    "name": "delete_objects_batch"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`keys`	Yes
`bucket`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Oct 4, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden for a destructive operation. It discloses only the 1000-object batch cap and says nothing about permissions, reversibility, partial-failure behavior, or how missing/nonexistent keys are handled.

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 short sentence, front-loaded with the operation and followed by the batch limit. Nothing is wasted, though the 1000 cap duplicates the schema's maxItems constraint.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a destructive batch tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is thin: it omits error semantics, partial-success handling, bucket scoping, and any authorization context an agent would need before invoking it.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% for two parameters. The description confirms that 'keys' is a list of object keys and restates the 1000 maxItems already enforced by the schema, but the 'bucket' parameter is never mentioned and no format or syntax detail is added.

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 states a specific verb+resource: batch-deleting a supplied list of object keys. This is distinguishable from the single-key delete_object and the delete_objects_by_prefix sibling, since it operates on an explicit key list, though no sibling is named.

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 explicit guidance on when to prefer this over delete_object (one key), delete_objects_by_prefix (prefix sweep), or repeated single deletes. The use case is only weakly implied by '指定的多个对象键列表'.

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