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, the description omits safety confirmation, pagination behavior, return structure, or default credential chain behavior when profile/region are omitted.

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?

Extremely brief at three words with no redundancy. However, brevity results in underspecification rather than efficient precision; front-loaded structure is appropriate but content is insufficient.

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?

Tool has only 3 primitive parameters (all optional) making it structurally simple, but absence of output schema and annotations means description should have disclosed return format or credential requirements. Adequate but incomplete.

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 (profile, region, max_results all documented), establishing baseline 3. Description adds no parameter-specific context (e.g., that max_results controls pagination, or default behavior when omitted).

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?

Uses specific verb 'List' and resource 'Glue ETL jobs', clearly identifying the AWS service and resource type. However, it fails to distinguish from sibling tool 'aws_glue_get_job_runs' (executions vs definitions), which could cause confusion.

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 this tool versus alternatives like 'aws_glue_get_job_runs', nor any prerequisites such as AWS credentials or IAM permissions required to list jobs.

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