Send a prompt to Amazon Q CLI to get AI assistance with coding questions, command translation, and status checks.
Execute Amazon Q CLI with a prompt to get AI assistance (alias for ask_q)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| agent | No | Agent/context profile to use (optional) | |
| model | No | Model to use (optional) | |
| prompt | Yes | The question or prompt to send to Amazon Q |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions executing a CLI and getting AI assistance, but does not disclose side effects, permissions, network usage, output format, or any operational traits beyond the basic function.
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?
The description is a single sentence with no wasted words. The core action is front-loaded, and the alias note efficiently prevents confusion with the sibling ask_q.
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?
For a simple tool with fully documented parameters, the description is adequate for basic invocation. However, it lacks behavioral details, return value expectations, and explicit guidance on choosing this alias over ask_q, leaving some contextual gaps.
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 100%, so all three parameters are already documented. The description adds no meaningful detail beyond the word 'prompt', which is already represented in the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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 description states a specific action ('Execute Amazon Q CLI') and resource ('Amazon Q CLI') with a prompt, and clarifies it is an alias for ask_q. It clearly conveys what the tool does, though 'AI assistance' remains somewhat generic.
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?
By explicitly stating 'alias for ask_q', the description gives clear context that this tool is interchangeable with the sibling ask_q. It does not provide explicit when/when-not guidance for other siblings, but the alias note makes the usage relationship unambiguous.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.