Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
hcloud-mcp

hcloud-mcp

by Xodus-CO
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

remove_server_from_placement_group

DestructiveIdempotent

Detach a server from its placement group by server ID and return an action to confirm the removal.

Instructions

Remove a server from its placement group. 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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "remove_server_from_placement_group"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesServer ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.1.1

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructive=true, idempotent=true, readOnly=false and openWorld=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact — the return is an Action — which matters because there is no output schema. It does not say what happens on error when the server has no placement group, nor what happens to a group left empty.

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?

Two short front-loaded sentences with no padding. 'Returns an Action' is elliptical and ambiguous to a reader unfamiliar with the API's Action object, keeping it just short of ideal.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a single-parameter destructive mutation with rich annotations, this is close to adequate, and the return-type note compensates for the missing output schema. Edge-case behavior (server not placed, empty group, failure mode) is absent, leaving real gaps for a destructive operation.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and the single 'id' parameter is documented as 'Server ID'. The description adds only implicit semantics (the group is derived from the server, so no group parameter exists), which is a mild but real clarification beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Remove a server from its placement group') and makes clear the server's own group is targeted rather than a caller-supplied group. It reads as the natural inverse of add_server_to_placement_group, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this versus alternatives, no preconditions (e.g. server must belong to a placement group), and no mention of the companion add/delete placement group operations. The agent must infer all usage context.

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