hcloud_show_dcs_instance

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only that it targets a single Redis-flavored DCS instance; it says nothing about failure behavior when the instance is not found, region scoping implications, or the shape of the returned detail, which is meaningful for a read that has no output schema.

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 front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the resource and qualifier appear immediately. It is efficient but so terse that it omits useful operational detail rather than wasting words.

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 tool is simple (two required params, rich annotations), so the short description is nearly sufficient. However, with no output schema, some statement about what details are returned, or about the not-found case, would make it complete.

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 nominally 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the schema descriptions are bare restatements ('Region', 'Instance ID'). The description adds no meaning about region semantics (e.g., region/project scoping) or where instance_id is sourced, so it does not compensate for the shallow schema text.

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 ('Get details') and resource ('a specific DCS (Redis) instance'), and the word 'specific' implicitly separates it from the list sibling hcloud_list_dcs_instances. It is clear but never names the sibling that returns the collection from which instance_id must be obtained.

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: an agent can infer this is the detail lookup used after hcloud_list_dcs_instances, but the description states no when-to-use condition, no prerequisite that instance_id comes from the list call, and no when-not guidance. The sibling list (list_dcs_instances, list_dcs_available_zones) is never referenced.

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