hostinger-api-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states it's a retrieval operation, implying read-only behavior, but doesn't disclose authentication needs, rate limits, error conditions, or what 'comprehensive' includes. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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?

Two sentences, zero waste. The first states the core purpose, the second adds usage context. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the essential action.

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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and a single parameter with full schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose but lacks details on return values, error handling, or behavioral traits needed for full contextual understanding.

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%, with the parameter 'virtualMachineId' clearly documented. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or constraints. With high schema coverage, the baseline is 3.

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 clearly states the verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('detailed information about a specified virtual machine'), making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from siblings like 'VPS_getVirtualMachinesV1' (list) and 'VPS_getActionDetailsV1' (actions), but doesn't explicitly name them, so it's not a perfect 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?

The second sentence provides implied context ('to view comprehensive VPS configuration and status'), suggesting when to use it, but lacks explicit guidance on when NOT to use it or alternatives. No comparison to similar tools like 'VPS_getVirtualMachinesV1' is mentioned.

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