Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
hcloud-mcp

hcloud-mcp

by Xodus-CO
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

change_protection

DestructiveIdempotent

Enable or disable protection for Hetzner Cloud servers, volumes, networks, load balancers, IPs, and images to prevent deletion; for servers, also block rebuilds.

Instructions

Enable/disable protection on a server, volume, floating_ip, primary_ip, load_balancer, network or image (snapshot/backup). Protected resources cannot be deleted (servers: nor rebuilt). delete applies to all; rebuild only to servers, and the API currently requires a server's delete and rebuild to be equal, so passing just one for a server sets both. For DNS use change_zone_protection / change_rrset_protection; certificates have no protection. Returns an Action

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": {
      "resource": "<resource>",
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "change_protection"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesResource ID
deleteNoPrevent deletion
rebuildNoServers only: prevent rebuild
resourceYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.1.1

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds the substantive consequence (protected resources cannot be deleted, nor rebuilt for servers) and a non-obvious API quirk where passing only one of delete/rebuild for a server sets both. It also states the return is an Action. It stops short of mentioning permission requirements or what happens on an already-protected resource, which keeps it at 4 rather than 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and resource list, then constraints, then sibling routing — a sensible order with no filler sentences. It is dense and uses backticks for parameter names, which is readable but borders on packed; nothing is redundant, though.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a 4-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the definition covers scope, side effects, the delete/rebuild coupling, sibling alternatives, and return type (Action). The remaining hole is the enable-vs-disable semantics when neither boolean is supplied, which an agent would have to guess.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 75% and the schema already documents id/delete/rebuild, but the description adds real meaning beyond it: `delete` applies to all resource types while `rebuild` is servers-only, plus the coupling rule between them. The main gap is that it never states what omitting both flags does (presumably enabling protection) or how to disable protection, which is the headline half of the verb.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb pair and resource ("Enable/disable protection on a server, volume, floating_ip...") and enumerates every supported resource type, so the agent knows the exact scope without opening the enum. It also names the sibling tools it is not (change_zone_protection / change_rrset_protection) and excludes certificates, which distinguishes it cleanly from adjacent `change_*` tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit routing rules are given: DNS resources go to change_zone_protection or change_rrset_protection, and certificates have no protection at all, so there is a stated when-not-to-use. It also explains the constraint that a server's `delete` and `rebuild` must be equal, telling the agent how to call it correctly rather than leaving that to discovery.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools