AWS MCP Server

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It adds valuable context by defining what 'scaling activities' means (scale-out/in, failures) and hints at time-boundedness ('recent'), but omits permission requirements, pagination behavior, and the exact time window for 'recent'.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded action verb, zero redundancy. Parenthetical efficiently clarifies activity types without wasting words. Every element earns its place.

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?

Given 100% schema coverage and 4 straightforward parameters, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose. No output schema exists, so explanation of return structure isn't expected here, though mentioning pagination or default time ranges would improve completeness.

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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for all 4 parameters. The description mentions 'recent' which loosely contextualizes max_records, but adds no syntax, format, or cross-parameter dependency details beyond the schema baseline.

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?

Excellent specificity: verb 'Get', resource 'scaling activities', scope 'for an Auto Scaling Group', with parenthetical examples ('scale-out/in events, failures') that clearly distinguish it from sibling ASG tools that return configuration (describe_auto_scaling_groups) or policies (describe_scaling_policies).

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?

Implies usage context by specifying content type ('activities' vs configuration), but lacks explicit 'when to use this instead of describe_auto_scaling_groups' guidance or prerequisites like required IAM permissions.

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