Find incomplete S3 multipart uploads older than a specified age (default 24 hours) to clean up stale uploads. Scans a bucket for uploads exceeding the time threshold.
Find uploads older than N hours (default 24), bounded by max_scan.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| bucket | Yes | ||
| prefix | No | ||
| max_scan | No | ||
| upload_id | No | ||
| older_than_hours | No | ||
| continuation_token | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose one meaningful behavior not present in the schema: the scan is 'bounded by max_scan', implying results may be truncated. It says nothing about read-only safety, permissions, or how partial results are signalled, which leaves real gaps for a 6-parameter tool.
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?
A single sentence with no filler, and the core scoping detail (older than N hours) is front-loaded. It is efficient, though arguably too terse for a six-parameter tool, which shows up as a completeness gap rather than verbosity.
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?
With no annotations, no output schema, and six parameters, the description should explain what is returned (list of uploads and which fields), how pagination via continuation_token works, and how this differs from s3_list_multipart_uploads. None of that is present, leaving the agent under-informed for a non-trivial tool.
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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds genuine meaning for the two least obvious parameters (older_than_hours default of 24, and max_scan as a scan bound), but leaves bucket, prefix, upload_id, and continuation_token entirely undocumented, so compensation is only partial.
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?
The verb 'Find' plus 'uploads older than N hours' gives a rough idea, and the name says 'unfinished uploads', so the agent can infer this surfaces stale/incomplete multipart uploads. However, the description never actually says 'multipart' or what makes an upload 'unfinished', and it does not differentiate from the sibling s3_list_multipart_uploads, which appears to overlap.
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?
There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of when not to use it, and no reference to the obvious alternative s3_list_multipart_uploads. The only contextual hint is the default threshold, which is a parameter detail rather than usage guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.