Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AWS MCP Server

AWS MCP Server

by marcelobrake
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

aws_cloudtrail_describe_trails

Retrieve details about AWS CloudTrail trails to monitor account activity and audit API calls across AWS services.

Instructions

Describe CloudTrail trails in the account.

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": "aws_cloudtrail_describe_trails"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
profileNoAWS profile name from ~/.aws/config (e.g., 'default', 'production')
regionNoAWS region override (e.g., 'us-east-1', 'sa-east-1')
trail_name_listNoSpecific trail names or ARNs (optional — returns all if omitted)
include_shadow_trailsNoInclude shadow trails from other regions (default: true)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full disclosure burden. Fails to mention this is read-only, what specific trail attributes are returned, pagination behavior, or AWS rate limit considerations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence is front-loaded and contains no waste, but is inappropriately brief for a 4-parameter AWS API tool. Lacks necessary elaboration on behavior and return values.

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?

Inadequate for tool complexity. No output schema exists, yet description fails to explain what 'describe' encompasses (configuration details, ARN, S3 bucket destination), default behavior when trail_name_list is omitted, or multi-region considerations.

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%, providing detailed descriptions for all 4 parameters including optionality behavior. Description adds no parameter-specific guidance beyond schema, warranting baseline score.

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?

States specific verb (describe) and resource (CloudTrail trails) clearly. However, lacks explicit differentiation from sibling tool `aws_cloudtrail_get_trail_status` which could be confused as another descriptive operation.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use versus `lookup_events` or `get_trail_status`, nor does it mention that all parameters are optional and the tool returns all trails by default.

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