hcloud_list_kms_key_detail

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by naming the returned fields (state, creation date, etc.), which matters given there is no output schema, but it says nothing about behavior on a nonexistent key, cross-region lookup semantics, or permissions required.

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?

A single short sentence with the resource and payload type front-loaded, no filler. The trailing 'etc.' slightly weakens precision but costs little space.

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 simple two-parameter read tool with annotations, this is close to adequate, and the parenthetical field list partly compensates for the missing output schema. It falls short on region/key_id semantics and failure behavior, which are the main things an agent could get wrong 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% with only two required parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema — it does not explain that region selects the endpoint and must match the key's region, nor the key_id format.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource: 'Get details of a specific KMS key', which resolves the ambiguity of the misleading tool name (hcloud_list_kms_key_detail sounds like a list). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling hcloud_list_kms_keys, leaving the agent to infer that this is the single-key variant.

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 only implied by the phrase 'a specific KMS key' — the agent can infer this is for retrieving one key once its ID is known. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no statement of when to prefer hcloud_list_kms_keys instead, and no prerequisite or error-condition notes.

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