AWS MCP Server

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full disclosure burden. 'List' implies read-only but does not explicitly confirm safety, idempotency, pagination behavior, or result format. Does not mention the maximum page size or that results may be truncated without pagination tokens.

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 7-word sentence with zero redundancy. Main action and resource front-loaded. Parenthetical scoping is efficient and informative. Every word 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?

Adequate for a simple enumeration tool with complete input schema. However, lacks description of return values (no output schema exists to compensate) and pagination behavior. Sufficient for tool selection but not for full operational understanding.

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 has 100% description coverage with clear parameter types and purposes. Description mentions 'event buses' which loosely contextualizes the `name_prefix` parameter, but adds no semantic detail beyond the schema (e.g., no mention of regex limitations on name_prefix or default limit behavior). Baseline 3 appropriate for high-coverage schemas.

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?

Clear verb 'List' + resource 'EventBridge event buses' with scope clarification (default, custom, partner). Accurately identifies the AWS service and resource type. Lacks explicit differentiation from sibling `aws_events_list_rules`, but the resource specificity makes the intent unambiguous.

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 on when to use versus siblings like `aws_events_describe_rule` or `aws_events_list_targets_by_rule`. No mention of prerequisites (AWS credentials) or that all parameters are optional. Zero behavioral context for the agent to make selection decisions.

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