AWS MCP Server

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. 'Get' implies read-only behavior, and listing return attributes helps, but lacks disclosure of AWS permission requirements (e.g., sns:GetTopicAttributes), potential throttling, or error conditions (e.g., TopicNotFound).

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 high information density. Front-loaded action ('Get attributes'), specific resource ('SNS topic'), and immediately follows with colon-separated examples of returned data. Zero wasted words.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description compensates by enumerating specific returned attributes (ARN, display name, etc.), giving callers clear expectations of the data payload. Adequate for a standard AWS describe/get operation.

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% with all three parameters (profile, region, topic_arn) well-described. The description mentions 'SNS topic' implying the topic_arn parameter but adds no additional semantic guidance beyond the schema definitions.

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 specific verb ('Get') and resource ('attributes of an SNS topic') with concrete examples (ARN, display name, subscription count, policy). However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling 'aws_sns_list_topics' in the description text.

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?

Implies usage context through the required 'topic_arn' parameter and the list of returned attributes, but provides no explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison to alternative tools like the list_topics variant.

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