hcloud_list_servers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety and idempotency profile is covered without the description's help. The description adds only the notion of optional filtering and says nothing about default result size, pagination behavior via limit/offset, or what happens when region matches nothing.

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 front-loaded and no filler whatsoever. It is appropriately sized, though it is terse enough that some necessary context (pagination, return shape) is absent rather than merely trimmed.

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?

With six parameters, one required, a fully documented schema and useful annotations, the definition is usable as-is. However, there is no output schema, so the description should have indicated that it returns a collection (and how limit/offset shape it), which is a meaningful gap for a list tool.

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%, so every parameter including the required region and the fuzzy-match name filter is already documented in the schema, setting the baseline at 3. The description's generic "optional filters" phrase adds no meaning beyond that, though it does at least signal that filtering is the tool's core mechanic.

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?

The description gives a specific verb and resource ("List ECS cloud servers") plus a scope note ("with optional filters"), which is clear enough to distinguish it from the show/detail siblings by name. It stops short of any explicit sibling differentiation, such as pointing to hcloud_show_server for a single server's details.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance: nothing says to call this to enumerate servers before calling hcloud_show_server, nor how to combine filters. "Optional filters" is implied usage only, and no alternatives or exclusions are named despite many adjacent list/show tools.

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