List all S3 buckets to view and manage your cloud storage resources.
List all S3 buckets
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": "list_buckets"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'list' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly state that it has no side effects or mention any permissions or rate limits. For a simple list operation, this is acceptable but could be more explicit.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, brief sentence that fully conveys the tool's purpose. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or unnecessary detail.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool is extremely simple with no parameters and no output schema. The description fully covers the tool's behavior and scope. There is no missing information that would hinder an agent from using it correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has zero parameters, so the schema is empty and this dimension is not applicable. Per the rubric, a baseline of 4 is appropriate when there are no parameters to describe.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description 'List all S3 buckets' uses a specific verb ('list') and clearly identifies the resource ('S3 buckets') and scope ('all'). This clearly differentiates it from the sibling tools create_bucket and delete_bucket.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The context is clear: the tool lists buckets, which is distinct from creating or deleting. There are no exclusions or alternative tools mentioned, but the name and description make the usage obvious given the sibling tool names.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.