Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
aws-security-mcp

aws-security-mcp

by jowhee327
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

scan_public_access_verify

Scan AWS and other cloud accounts for publicly accessible resources, verifying exposure without changing any resources.

Instructions

Run Public Access Verify security scanner only. Read-only. Does not modify any AWS resources.

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": "scan_public_access_verify"
  }
}

Input 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). With alicloud (EXPERIMENTAL — not yet validated against a live account), region is an Alibaba Cloud region ID (e.g. cn-hangzhou); omit or "all" to scan every region; single-account only in this phase. With azure (EXPERIMENTAL — not yet validated against a live account), the China cloud (21Vianet) is the default; set AZURE_CLOUD=global for public cloud. region is an Azure subscription ID; omit or "all" to scan every visible subscription.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.10.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / provider / description
      Previous value: -"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)."New value: +"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). With alicloud (EXPERIMENTAL — not yet validated against a live account), region is an Alibaba Cloud region ID (e.g. cn-hangzhou); omit or \"all\" to scan every region; single-account only in this phase. With azure (EXPERIMENTAL — not yet validated against a live account), the China cloud (21Vianet) is the default; set AZURE_CLOUD=global for public cloud. region is an Azure subscription ID; omit or \"all\" to scan every visible subscription."
    • changedInput schema / properties / provider / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "aws",
-  "huaweicloud"
-]New value: +[
+  "aws",
+  "huaweicloud",
+  "alicloud",
+  "azure"
+]
  2. 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"
+}
  3. First observedv0.7.6

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden; it does discharge the most important part by stating "Read-only. Does not modify any AWS resources." Beyond safety, nothing is disclosed about required credentials/permissions, runtime, cost, pagination, or result shape. The AWS-specific phrasing is also narrower than the schema's multi-cloud support, though it does not directly contradict it.

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?

Three short front-loaded fragments with zero filler; the read-only guarantee sits early where it matters. It is terse to the point that space saved is spent on nothing substantive, but no sentence is wasteful.

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?

For a multi-cloud, zero-config, no-annotation scan tool with no output schema, the description leaves the agent guessing about what resources are audited, what credentials are expected, and what the results contain. The safety statement is the only substantive content relative to a fairly complex operation.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the provider enum is fully documented in the schema, including Huawei Cloud and Azure caveats, so the description need not repeat any of it. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema — no guidance on when to pass provider versus relying on the default, and no region/provider interaction notes of its own.

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 gives a verb (run) and names the resource as "Public Access Verify security scanner," which mostly restates the tool name itself. It never says what is actually being checked for public access — buckets, security groups, databases, storage accounts — so an agent cannot tell the scan's target scope from the description alone. It only weakly distinguishes itself from siblings like scan_network_reachability or scan_secret_exposure.

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?

The word "only" suggests this tool should not be used for other scan types, which is a faint routing hint. There is no explicit guidance on when to pick this over scan_all, scan_group, or the other scan_* tools, and no prerequisites, ordering, or follow-up (e.g., pair with generate_report) are stated.

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