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

Annotations only carry destructiveHint=true, so the description's disclosure that this adds roughly 20% to the server's price is meaningful behavioral context an agent cannot get elsewhere. It still omits whether the change is idempotent or immediately billable.

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?

Two short sentences plus an endpoint reference, front-loaded with the action and the cost consequence. No filler.

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 single-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the action, cost impact, and API mapping. Minor gaps around permissions and reversibility remain but are not critical here.

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% for the single server_id parameter, so the description adds no meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: 'Turn on automatic backups for a server.' It is clearly the inverse of the sibling hetzner_disable_server_backup, though the description never names that sibling to make the routing explicit.

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?

Usage is implied by the action itself, but there is no explicit guidance on when to enable backups versus using hetzner_change_server_protection, nor any prerequisites or exclusions.

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