AWS MCP Server

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. While 'List' implies read-only access, it does not confirm this, nor does it disclose pagination behavior (despite having max_results), rate limits, IAM permissions required, or output format details.

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 with zero waste: efficiently conveys the core action, target resource, and return payload without redundancy.

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?

With 100% schema coverage and a simple listing purpose, the description is minimally sufficient. However, given no output schema exists and there are 6 optional parameters with no behavioral guidance, it lacks completeness regarding usage patterns and result structure.

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 comprehensive descriptions for all 6 parameters (including enum values for by_state). Description mentions 'status and resource details' hinting at return value content, but does not add semantics for how parameters interact (e.g., filter logic is AND or OR).

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 specific verb 'List' and resource 'AWS Backup jobs', and mentions return contents ('status and resource details'). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like aws_backup_list_backup_plans or aws_backup_list_recovery_points_by_backup_vault, which also list backup-related entities.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use filtering parameters (by_state, by_resource_type, etc.) versus retrieving all jobs, nor does it mention prerequisites like AWS credentials or typical use cases.

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