AWS MCP Server

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. The phrase 'full definition and configuration' hints at the return payload structure, but lacks explicit disclosure of read-only safety, required IAM permissions (states:DescribeStateMachine), or whether the output includes the full ASL JSON.

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 with zero waste. Front-loaded with the core action. However, given the absence of annotations and output schema, the extreme brevity leaves significant gaps that a second sentence could have addressed (e.g., 'Returns the state machine's ASL definition and metadata').

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?

No output schema exists, so description attempts to cover return value with 'full definition and configuration'. This is minimally sufficient but vague given AWS API complexity. Lacks workflow context (arn prerequisite) and behavioral safety characteristics that would help an autonomous agent select this confidently.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage (profile, region, state_machine_arn all documented). With high schema coverage, baseline score is 3. Description adds no parameter semantics beyond schema, but none are needed given complete schema documentation.

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 ('Get') and resource ('Step Functions state machine') with scope ('full definition and configuration'). However, it fails to explicitly distinguish from siblings like aws_sfn_list_state_machines or aws_sfn_describe_execution, which are distinct operations.

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 listing state machines or describing executions. No mention that the state_machine_arn typically comes from aws_sfn_list_state_machines, or that this is a read-only diagnostic operation.

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