hcloud_obs_lsList OBS buckets or objects in a bucket by region, with optional bucket, prefix, limit, and brief filters.
List OBS buckets or objects in a bucket
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| brief | No | Show brief output | |
| limit | No | Max results | |
| bucket | No | Bucket name (omit to list all buckets) | |
| prefix | No | Object key prefix filter | |
| region | Yes | Region |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.4.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare this as a read-only, idempotent, open-world operation, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the basic bucket-versus-object listing distinction but does not disclose return format, pagination behavior, or authentication/region requirements.
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?
The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted wording. It is appropriately sized for a simple list operation.
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?
The schema and annotations cover parameters and safety, but with no output schema the description does not explain what the returned buckets or objects look like or how 'limit' and 'brief' affect results. For a five-parameter list tool, the definition is adequate but missing helpful return-value context.
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 coverage is 100%, so all parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description adds little meaning beyond the schema, though the phrase 'in a bucket' reinforces the bucket scoping behavior.
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 OBS buckets or objects in a bucket') and makes clear that it can operate in two modes. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling tools hcloud_obs_stat and hcloud_obs_cat, so it falls short of full sibling differentiation.
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?
The description states what the tool does but offers no explicit guidance on when to use it versus hcloud_obs_stat or hcloud_obs_cat. The bucket omission behavior is only in the schema, not in the description, leaving selection guidance implicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.