Skip to main content
Glama
lazyants

hetzner-mcp-server

by lazyants
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Change Load Balancer Reverse DNS

hetzner_change_lb_dns_ptr
Idempotent

Update the reverse DNS PTR record for a load balancer's public IP address. Set dns_ptr to null to reset the entry to its default value.

Instructions

Change the reverse DNS entry for one of a load balancer's public IP addresses. Set dns_ptr to null to reset to the default.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesLoad Balancer ID
ipYesPublic IPv4 or IPv6 address of the load balancer to set the reverse DNS entry for
dns_ptrYesReverse DNS PTR record value, or null to reset to the default

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv3.0.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / dns_ptr / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
    • addedInput schema / properties / dns_ptr / type
      Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
  2. First observedv2.2.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, idempotent=true, and destructive=false, lowering the burden. The description adds the genuinely useful semantic that dns_ptr=null resets to the default, but does not state the effect on the action/response or any auth prerequisites.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the operation and followed by the key null-reset detail. No filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

A simple three-parameter mutation with fully documented schema and no output schema; the description covers what the agent needs to call it correctly. Only minor gaps around response/action behavior remain.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the dns_ptr description in the schema already explains the null-reset behavior, so the description largely repeats structured data. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (change) and resource (reverse DNS entry) scoped to a load balancer's public IP addresses, which distinguishes it from server/floating-IP rdns siblings. It is clear but does not explicitly name those alternatives.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives no when-to-use context or contrast with the analogous hetzner_change_dns_ptr, hetzner_change_floating_ip_rdns, or hetzner_change_primary_ip_rdns tools. Usage must be inferred entirely from the name and resource mention.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools