Skip to main content
Glama
jowhee327

aws-security-mcp

by jowhee327
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

scan_patch_compliance_findings

Run a read-only scan to identify patch compliance findings across AWS or Huawei Cloud. Pinpoint missing patches and non-compliant instances without altering resources.

Instructions

Run Patch Compliance Findings security scanner only. Read-only. Does not modify any AWS resources.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
regionNoAWS region to scan (default: server region)
providerNoCloud provider to scan (default: aws). With huaweicloud, `region` is a Huawei Cloud region ID (e.g. cn-north-4); omit it or pass "all" to scan every region project of the account. Huawei Cloud Phase 1 is single-account (org_mode falls back to the current account with a warning).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.9.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / provider
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Cloud provider to scan (default: aws). With huaweicloud, `region` is a Huawei Cloud region ID (e.g. cn-north-4); omit it or pass \"all\" to scan every region project of the account. Huawei Cloud Phase 1 is single-account (org_mode falls back to the current account with a warning).",
+  "enum": [
+    "aws",
+    "huaweicloud"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv0.7.6

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full safety burden, and it explicitly states 'Read-only. Does not modify any AWS resources.' This is a crucial behavioral disclosure for a scanner that could otherwise be assumed to take remediation actions. It does not describe return/output behavior, but the read-only/no-modification claim covers the main side-effect risk.

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?

Three short declarative sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, with no filler. Each sentence adds a distinct constraint: what to run, that it is read-only, and that it does not touch AWS resources. This is very efficient.

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?

For a low-complexity scanner with two fully documented optional parameters, the description is mostly sufficient: purpose and safety are clear. However, there is no description of what the tool returns, and the no-modification statement only mentions AWS resources even though the provider enum includes Huawei Cloud. These are minor but real gaps.

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 input schema already documents both parameters at 100% coverage, so the description does not need to repeat them. The description adds no parameter-level semantics, but the enum, defaults, and provider/region interaction are already in the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

'Run Patch Compliance Findings security scanner only' gives a concrete verb, a specific scan target, and an explicit scope restriction. It is immediately clear this is a single-purpose findings scanner among the scan_* siblings. It does not name an alternative, but the resource and 'only' are sufficient.

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?

The phrase 'scanner only' and 'Read-only' imply this tool should be used for the isolated patch-compliance scan rather than broader scan/report flows. However, it names no sibling alternatives and gives no explicit conditions for choosing this over scan_all, scan_and_report, or the other findings scanners. Usage guidance is implied, not explicit.

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