quicksight-mcp

add_filter_group

Add a filter group to a QuickSight analysis to limit or scope data shown in visuals. A backup is created automatically before modifying the analysis definition.

Instructions

Add a filter group to a QuickSight analysis.

WARNING: This modifies the analysis definition. A backup is automatically created before making changes.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`analysis_id`	Yes	The QuickSight analysis ID.
`filter_group_definition`	Yes	JSON string of the filter group. Must include FilterGroupId, Filters array, CrossDataset setting, and ScopeConfiguration. Example: {"FilterGroupId": "my-filter-group", "Filters": [{"CategoryFilter": {...}}], "CrossDataset": "SINGLE_DATASET", "ScopeConfiguration": { "SelectedSheets": { "SheetVisualScopingConfigurations": [ {"SheetId": "...", "Scope": "ALL_VISUALS"} ] } }, "Status": "ENABLED"}

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.0Sep 13, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It does disclose that this mutates the analysis definition and that a backup is created automatically before changes, which is genuinely useful. It omits permission requirements, idempotency (what happens if the FilterGroupId already exists), and failure modes.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the warning. Nothing is wasted, though the warning could be more tightly phrased.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, for a mutation tool with zero annotations, the definition leaves gaps around permissions, overwrite behavior on a duplicate FilterGroupId, and failure conditions.

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 filter_group_definition description already includes a full example with required keys. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Add a filter group to a QuickSight analysis'), which is unambiguous. It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling delete_filter_group or get_filters, so it lands one notch below the top tier.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives such as delete_filter_group, nor any stated prerequisites. The only contextual note is the backup warning, which is behavior, not usage routing.

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

Deploy Server