Skip to main content
Glama
code-alchemist01

MCP Cloud Services Server

analyze_permissions

Analyze IAM permissions and access policies across AWS, Azure, or GCP cloud providers to identify security compliance issues and manage resource access.

Instructions

Analyze IAM permissions and access policies

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
providerYesCloud provider

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function implementation for the 'analyze_permissions' tool. It returns a placeholder response with recommendations since full implementation is pending.
    case 'analyze_permissions': {
      return {
        provider,
        message: 'Permission analysis not yet fully implemented',
        recommendations: [
          'Review IAM policies regularly',
          'Follow principle of least privilege',
          'Enable MFA for all users',
          'Audit permissions quarterly',
        ],
      };
    }
  • Tool schema definition including name, description, and input schema requiring a 'provider' parameter.
    {
      name: 'analyze_permissions',
      description: 'Analyze IAM permissions and access policies',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          provider: {
            type: 'string',
            enum: ['aws', 'azure', 'gcp'],
            description: 'Cloud provider',
          },
        },
        required: ['provider'],
      },
    },
  • src/server.ts:19-27 (registration)
    Registration of all tools including securityTools (which contains 'analyze_permissions') into the main allTools array used for listing tools.
    const allTools = [
      ...awsTools,
      ...azureTools,
      ...gcpTools,
      ...resourceManagementTools,
      ...costAnalysisTools,
      ...monitoringTools,
      ...securityTools,
    ];
  • src/server.ts:76-77 (registration)
    Dispatch logic in the MCP server that routes calls to 'analyze_permissions' (via securityTools check) to the handleSecurityTool function.
    } else if (securityTools.some((t) => t.name === name)) {
      result = await handleSecurityTool(name, args || {});
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states what the tool does without disclosing behavioral traits. It doesn't mention if this is a read-only operation, requires specific permissions, has rate limits, or what the analysis entails, leaving significant gaps.

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 with no wasted words, making it appropriately sized and front-loaded. It directly states the tool's function without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

Given the complexity of IAM analysis and lack of annotations or output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the analysis returns, how it's performed, or any prerequisites, leaving the agent with incomplete information for effective use.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage, with the single parameter 'provider' clearly documented as the cloud provider with enum values. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the tool analyzes IAM permissions and access policies, which is a clear purpose but lacks specificity about scope or granularity. It doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like check_compliance or scan_security_issues, which might overlap in security analysis domains.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like check_compliance or scan_security_issues. The description implies a focus on permissions, but without explicit context or exclusions, usage remains ambiguous.

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/code-alchemist01/Cloud-mcp_server'

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