hcloud_show_sms_server

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 no behavior beyond that: nothing about what happens when the server_id is unknown, whether lookup is region-scoped, or what the 'details' comprise. It essentially restates the title.

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 its scope come first and the acronym is disambiguated inline. Nothing is wasted.

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 and schema coverage, the definition is barely sufficient. Because there is no output schema, the agent has no idea what fields the returned 'details' contain, and the description does not compensate for that gap.

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% and both parameters (region, server_id) are required and documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description only hints that server_id identifies a 'specific' server and says nothing about how region constrains the lookup or what format an ID takes.

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?

States a specific verb ('Get details of') and a specific resource (an SMS source server), and expands the SMS acronym so the domain is unambiguous. The word 'specific' implicitly contrasts with the sibling hcloud_list_sms_servers, but it never names that sibling explicitly.

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 for fetching one server when it already holds a server_id, versus listing servers. There is no explicit when-to-use, prerequisites, or named alternative such as hcloud_list_sms_servers for discovery.

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