Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-elasticache-ops

mcp-elasticache-ops

by ritojoao
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Aws Serverless Triage

aws_serverless_triage
Read-onlyIdempotent

Summarize a serverless cache's incident health in one call, covering status, usage limits, snapshot health, and six-hour throttling, ECPU, and storage trends against limits.

Instructions

One-call incident summary for a serverless cache: status, usage limits, snapshot health, 6h ThrottledCmds/ECPU/storage vs limits. Findings worst-first (max 30); a failing section is reported unavailable.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "serverless_cache_name": "<serverless_cache_name>"
    },
    "name": "aws_serverless_triage"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
regionNoAWS region; defaults to AWS_REGION
serverless_cache_nameYesServerlessCacheName to triage

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior beyond them: findings are ordered worst-first, output is capped at 30, and a failing section degrades to 'reported unavailable' rather than failing the whole call. It does not mention cost/latency of an open-world multi-API sweep, which would have pushed it higher.

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?

Two sentences, zero preamble, with the summary scope front-loaded and the behavioral caveats second. The metric clause '6h ThrottledCmds/ECPU/storage vs limits' is dense but each token carries scope information rather than filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return-value shape needn't be explained, and the description still covers truncation, ordering, and partial-failure behavior. What remains unaddressed is the operational cost/latency profile of an open-world triage call and any permission prerequisites.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters (serverless_cache_name, region with AWS_REGION default) are already documented in structured data. The description adds no naming, format, or region-resolution detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb+resource ('One-call incident summary for a serverless cache') and enumerates exactly what is aggregated: status, usage limits, snapshot health, and 6h ThrottledCmds/ECPU/storage vs limits. That scope makes it distinguishable from the sibling list tools (aws_serverless_caches, aws_serverless_snapshots) and from a general aws_triage.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'One-call incident summary' implies the incident-triage context and implies preferring this over calling several single-purpose tools, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement and no named alternative. The agent must infer that this is the entry point for serverless cache incidents rather than a listing or audit tool.

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