Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AWS MCP Server

AWS MCP Server

by marcelobrake
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

aws_glue_get_crawlers

Retrieve a list of AWS Glue crawlers to monitor data cataloging jobs, configure crawler settings, and manage data discovery workflows.

Instructions

List Glue crawlers.

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_glue_get_crawlers"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
profileNoAWS profile name from ~/.aws/config (e.g., 'default', 'production')
regionNoAWS region override (e.g., 'us-east-1', 'sa-east-1')
max_resultsNoMaximum crawlers to return

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full disclosure burden but only implies read-only behavior via the word 'List'. It omits critical behavioral details: whether results are paginated, what fields are returned for each crawler, error conditions, or whether this lists all crawlers or requires filters.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The single sentence is appropriately brief and front-loaded with the action verb. However, it borders on under-specification rather than elegant conciseness, as it omits necessary contextual clues that would help an agent utilize the tool effectively.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description should disclose what data is returned (crawler names, ARNs, states, schedules) and operational constraints. It provides insufficient context for an AI agent to understand the full tool capability or interpret results.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for profile, region, and max_results. The tool description adds no additional parameter context (e.g., that max_results controls pagination), warranting the baseline score of 3 when schema documentation is comprehensive.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the basic verb ('List') and resource ('Glue crawlers'), providing minimal viable clarity. However, it fails to distinguish from siblings like 'aws_glue_get_jobs' or clarify whether it returns crawler configurations versus runs, leaving scope ambiguous.

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?

No guidance provided on when to use this versus alternatives (e.g., 'aws_glue_get_databases' for metadata exploration), prerequisites for the profile/region parameters, or pagination behavior when using max_results.

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