Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
s3-mcp-agent

s3-mcp-agent

by farishussain
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

list_buckets

Retrieves one bounded page of S3 buckets visible to the configured AWS identity, using a limit and continuation token to page through results.

Instructions

List one bounded page of buckets visible to the configured AWS identity.

Tool call template

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"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
continuation_tokenNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden alone; it does disclose two useful traits — results are paginated to 'one bounded page' and visibility is gated by the configured AWS identity (i.e., credentials determine results). It does not say how to advance pages, whether results are ordered, or anything about throttling.

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?

A single sentence with the scope qualifier front-loaded and no filler. Nothing to trim.

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?

The tool is simple and an output schema exists, so return-shape explanation is rightly omitted. However, for a paginated tool with zero parameter documentation, the description should explain the continuation-token round trip, which is the one thing an agent can get wrong here.

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%, so both parameters are bare names with defaults. The phrase 'one bounded page' gestures at pagination but never mentions limit or continuation_token, leaving the agent to guess that the token comes from a prior call and enforces the page size.

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+resource (list buckets) plus scope: 'visible to the configured AWS identity'. That naturally distinguishes it from list_objects (objects inside a bucket) and inspect_bucket (single-bucket detail), though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: listing at the account level is clearly distinct from drilling into one bucket or its objects. There is no explicit when-not guidance, no mention of what to do after a page is exhausted, and no pointer to the sibling that continues the workflow.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools