AWS OpenSearch MCP Server

diagnose_timestamp

Diagnose stale data by reviewing date mappings, min/max timestamps, and sample records to ensure data freshness.

Instructions

Diagnose stale data by checking date mappings, min/max values, and newest/oldest samples.

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": {
      "profile": "<profile>",
      "region": "<region>",
      "domain": "<domain>",
      "index": "<index>"
    },
    "name": "diagnose_timestamp"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`index`	Yes
`domain`	Yes
`region`	Yes
`profile`	Yes
`sample_size`	No
`timestamp_field`	No	@timestamp

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 8, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It lists diagnostic actions but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, required permissions, or potential side effects. Lacks behavioral context beyond the listed checks.

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?

Single sentence, no wasted words, front-loaded with the main purpose. However, additional structure (e.g., listing steps) could improve readability.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given 6 parameters (4 required) and no param descriptions, the description is insufficient. It does not cover error conditions, prerequisites, or the meaning of output. Presence of output schema reduces burden but not enough.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% and description does not explain how parameters (e.g., sample_size, timestamp_field) affect behavior. Only general actions like checking mappings and samples are mentioned, without mapping to specific parameters.

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?

Description clearly states the tool diagnoses stale data by checking date mappings, min/max values, and newest/oldest samples. The verb 'diagnose' and resource 'stale data' are specific, and the actions differentiate it from siblings like diagnose_cluster.

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?

Implied usage for stale data issues, but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., diagnose_cluster). No exclusions or when-not-to-use mentioned.

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