hcloud-mcp

update_storage_box_snapshot

Idempotent

Update a storage box snapshot's description or labels, with provided labels replacing the entire existing label set.

Instructions

Update a snapshot's description and/or labels (labels replace the whole set)

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>",
      "snapshot_id": "<snapshot_id>"
    },
    "name": "update_storage_box_snapshot"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Storage Box ID
`labels`	No
`description`	No
`snapshot_id`	Yes	Snapshot ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.1.1Nov 11, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish non-destructive, idempotent write behavior. The description adds genuinely new semantics beyond them: labels are replaced as a whole set, so the agent knows to send the complete label map rather than merge. It doesn't cover permission requirements or what happens to fields that are omitted.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the operation and immediately followed by the non-obvious replace semantics. Every clause carries information; nothing is padding.

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?

There is no output schema and four parameters including a nested map, so the description should carry more. The replace-the-whole-set caveat is present, but permission/scope needs and omit-vs-clear behavior for both fields are left unanswered.

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 50% — id and snapshot_id are documented, labels and description are not. The description recovers the most important hidden rule (labels replace the entire set) and names both mutable fields, but it says nothing about whether the description is overwritten wholesale or whether omitting a field leaves it unchanged.

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 ('Update a snapshot's description and/or labels') and names exactly which fields are mutable, which distinguishes it from rollback/delete/create siblings on the same resource. It does not, however, explicitly contrast itself with update_storage_box or rollback_storage_box_snapshot.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Scoping to description and labels implies this is metadata-only maintenance rather than snapshot restoration, but the description never says when to choose it over rollback or create, nor any prerequisites (snapshot must exist, plan enabled). Guidance is implied rather than stated.

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

Deploy Server