Create a new S3 bucket in an existing account by specifying the bucket name and confirming the operation.
Create a new bucket in an existing S3 account (s3/create_bucket).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| s3uid | No | S3 account UID; omit only if the token is bound to a single S3 account | |
| bucket | Yes | Bucket name | |
| confirm | Yes | Must be true to run the operation. | |
| account_id | No | Deprecated alias for s3uid / get_users.id |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.8Input schema / properties / account_id / descriptionPrevious value: -"Deprecated alias for s3uid"New value: +"Deprecated alias for s3uid / get_users.id"v1.0.4Input schema / properties / account_id / descriptionPrevious value: -"S3 account ID (if required; check via s3_get_users)"New value: +"Deprecated alias for s3uid"Input schema / properties / s3uidAdded value: +{
+ "description": "S3 account UID; omit only if the token is bound to a single S3 account",
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "number"
+ ]
+}v1.0.3Input schema / properties / account_id / descriptionPrevious value: -"ID S3-аккаунта (если требуется; уточняйте через s3_get_users)"New value: +"S3 account ID (if required; check via s3_get_users)"Input schema / properties / bucket / descriptionPrevious value: -"Имя бакета"New value: +"Bucket name"v1.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnly=false, destructive=false, openWorld=true), and the description adds essentially nothing beyond them — no note on name uniqueness/global namespace, idempotency on retry, permission requirements, or what is returned. The only extra is the API route, which is marginal.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler; the verb and resource come first and the API path is a compact parenthetical. Nothing wasteful.
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?
For a simple create operation with full schema coverage and annotations, the essentials are present, but the description omits the required confirm gate, whether creation is chargeable, and what success yields. Adequate but with clear gaps for a mutation tool.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters (including the deprecated account_id alias and the required confirm flag) are documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the work.
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?
States a specific verb+resource ('Create a new bucket') and scopes it ('in an existing S3 account'), plus the underlying API route. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like s3_delete_bucket and s3_get_buckets, though it never names or contrasts those siblings explicitly.
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?
There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention that an account must already exist (s3_create_account vs this tool), and no note that 'confirm' must be set true. The phrase 'existing S3 account' only hints at a prerequisite, leaving selection and usage to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.