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 fails to disclose read-only nature, error behavior when tasks don't exist, rate limiting characteristics, or that this requires existing task ARNs (not just names).

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 is appropriately brief and front-loaded with the action. No redundant or wasted text, though extreme brevity leaves functionality under-specified.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should describe what 'detailed information' means (container status, task definition, networking, etc.). It also omits the critical workflow step of obtaining task ARNs from list_tasks first.

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%, so baseline applies. While the schema clearly documents all four parameters (profile, region, cluster, tasks), the description adds no contextual meaning about the relationship between cluster and tasks parameters or AWS credential handling.

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?

The description states the basic action (Get detailed information) and resource (ECS tasks), but fails to distinguish from sibling tool aws_ecs_list_tasks. In AWS ECS, 'list' returns ARNs while 'describe' requires ARNs to return details—a crucial distinction missing here.

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?

No guidance provided on when to use this tool versus aws_ecs_list_tasks or aws_ecs_describe_services. Does not mention that task ARNs must be obtained from list_tasks first, nor prerequisites like cluster access permissions.

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