Skip to main content
Glama

list_rds_instances

List Amazon RDS database instances to view engine versions and current status for monitoring and management.

Instructions

Lists RDS instances with engine versions and status.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • Handler that executes DescribeDBInstancesCommand via rdsClient and returns formatted list of RDS instances including identifier, engine, version, class, status, and endpoint.
    if (name === "list_rds_instances") {
        const command = new DescribeDBInstancesCommand({});
        const response = await rdsClient.send(command);
    
        const instances = response.DBInstances?.map(db => ({
            DBInstanceIdentifier: db.DBInstanceIdentifier,
            Engine: db.Engine,
            EngineVersion: db.EngineVersion,
            DBInstanceClass: db.DBInstanceClass,
            DBInstanceStatus: db.DBInstanceStatus,
            Endpoint: db.Endpoint?.Address
        })) || [];
    
        return {
            content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(instances, null, 2) }]
        };
    }
  • src/index.ts:384-391 (registration)
    Tool registration entry in the ListToolsRequestSchema handler's tools array, defining name, description, and empty input schema.
    {
        name: "list_rds_instances",
        description: "Lists RDS instances with engine versions and status.",
        inputSchema: {
            type: "object",
            properties: {}
        }
    },
  • Initialization of the RDSClient used by the list_rds_instances handler.
    const rdsClient = new RDSClient({});
  • Import of RDSClient and DescribeDBInstancesCommand used in the tool implementation.
    import { RDSClient, DescribeDBInstancesCommand } from "@aws-sdk/client-rds";
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 burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool lists instances with engine versions and status, but does not cover critical aspects like authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior, error handling, or whether it's a read-only operation. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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 a single, efficient sentence: 'Lists RDS instances with engine versions and status.' It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, with no wasted words or redundant information, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 tool's complexity (simple listing with no parameters) and the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but lacks details on behavior, output format, or usage context. For a no-parameter tool, it meets basic needs but could be more complete by addressing behavioral aspects.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description does not add parameter semantics, but this is appropriate given the lack of parameters. The baseline score is 4 because the schema fully covers the parameters (none), and the description does not need to compensate.

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 tool's purpose as 'Lists RDS instances with engine versions and status,' which is a specific verb ('Lists') and resource ('RDS instances') with additional details ('engine versions and status'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_ec2_instances' by specifying RDS, but does not explicitly differentiate from other AWS listing tools beyond the resource type.

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, such as other AWS listing tools in the sibling list (e.g., 'list_ec2_instances' or 'list_dynamodb_tables'). It lacks context on prerequisites, exclusions, or specific scenarios for usage, leaving the agent to infer based on the resource name alone.

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/bhaveshopss/MCP-server'

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