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

mcp-elasticache-ops

by ritojoao
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Node Clients

node_clients
Read-onlyIdempotent

Aggregates Redis CLIENT LIST data by source IP, client name, ACL user, and last command, showing idle-time stats and top buffer-memory consumers for diagnosing ElastiCache client issues.

Instructions

CLIENT LIST aggregated by source IP, client name, ACL user and last command, idle-time stats and the clients holding the most buffer memory.

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": "node_clients"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
topNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish that this is a safe, idempotent, open-world read operation. The description adds useful behavioral context by stating the aggregation dimensions and that idle-time stats and buffer-memory-heavy clients are included. It does not explain how the top parameter limits or orders results, which is the main remaining behavioral gap.

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 description is a single compact sentence, front-loaded with the resource and aggregation dimensions. It is efficient and free of filler, though the opening noun phrase would be stronger with a clear verb and a sharper boundary against node_clients_summary.

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

Completeness3/5

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 details are not required in the description. For a low-complexity read tool this is mostly adequate, but the undocumented top parameter and unresolved relationship with node_clients_summary leave meaningful gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has one parameter, top, with 0% description coverage, and the description never mentions it, its default of 20, its maximum of 500, or what the top ranking is based on. Because the schema provides no semantic description, the definition should compensate but does not.

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 identifies the resource as an aggregated CLIENT LIST and names the aggregation dimensions (source IP, client name, ACL user, last command) plus idle-time and buffer-memory callouts. However, it never gives an explicit verb and does not distinguish this tool from the sibling node_clients_summary, which sounds like an adjacent aggregation view. An agent can infer the topic but not confidently choose between the two.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of when to prefer node_clients_summary or other client-related siblings. The description only defines the aggregation content, leaving the selection decision to the agent.

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