I tend to err more often on the side of applying some extra error checking and logging when it isn't needed,

This is going to sound supercilious, and there is nothing I can do about it.

Don't err .. find out.

The source of the OPs data is most likely this API. And the source of that API is whatever filesystem + metadata that underlies the Amazon EBS filesystem. Which AFAIK means, that unless you are party to some inside information, your (the OPs) only choice is to trust the results that API returns are uncorrupted; because you (he) simply do not have enough information to determine otherwise.

So in this case, erring on the side of caution isn't "a sensible precaution", nor "being proactive"; nor "good methodology"; it is a complete waste of either your employer's or client's time, resource and money. And yours. Performing a test, because it is easy to do, despite the fact that you know it will only detect some minuscule percentage of the possible failures, all 3-sigma outliers to boot, serves only to slow things down for no statistically likely benefit.

It is supplementing a belt made of kevlar, with braces made of overcooked spaghetti. Or betting an accumulator on two successive lotteries.