hcloud_show_server

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 nothing beyond that — no statement about what fields are returned, whether the call fails for a nonexistent ID, or any regional/auth considerations for this read operation.

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 verb and resource front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though the brevity is close to under-specification given the number of sibling tools with similar names.

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 full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient. It still leaves an agent without guidance on obtaining a valid server_id or on what the returned detail set contains.

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 both required parameters (region, server_id) are documented in the schema and the baseline is 3. The description contributes no extra meaning, such as the expected ID format or whether region must match the server's actual region.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get details') and resource ('a specific ECS server'), and the word 'specific' signals single-item retrieval rather than listing. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the many sibling show_* tools or from hcloud_list_servers, so it falls short of a 5.

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, no mention of the prerequisite of knowing a server_id (e.g., obtained from hcloud_list_servers), and no exclusion or alternative named. An agent must infer the list-then-show workflow on its own.

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