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

s3-mcp-agent

by farishussain
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

list_objects

Lists one bounded page of objects in an Amazon S3 bucket, using prefix filters and continuation tokens to inspect stored bucket contents.

Instructions

List one bounded page of objects in a bucket.

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": {
      "bucket": "<bucket>"
    },
    "name": "list_objects"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
bucketYes
prefixNo
continuation_tokenNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden; it does disclose the important trait that results are a single bounded page rather than an exhaustive listing. However, it says nothing about ordering, permissions required, or how to continue, which are the behaviors an agent most needs for a paginated list.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is structurally clean. Its brevity edges into under-specification rather than excess, so it is efficient but thin.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, but a four-parameter listing tool with 0% schema coverage and no annotations needs more than one sentence. The pagination contract and prefix filter remain undefined, which is a real gap for correct invocation.

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% across four parameters, so the description must compensate and largely does not. "Bounded page" hints that limit caps results, but prefix filtering and continuation_token paging semantics are never explained, leaving the two most non-obvious parameters opaque.

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?

"List one bounded page of objects in a bucket" gives a specific verb (list) and resource (objects within a bucket), which separates it implicitly from list_buckets. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like download_object or bucket_coverage_report, so it stops short of a 5.

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 statement of when to use this versus list_buckets, download_object, or bucket_coverage_report, and no guidance on iterating pages. The agent must infer the usage context from the name alone.

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