Skip to main content
Glama
lazyants

hetzner-mcp-server

by lazyants
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

List Load Balancer Actions

hetzner_list_load_balancer_actions
Read-onlyIdempotent

List actions performed on a load balancer, including service changes and target attachments, to audit or troubleshoot configuration history.

Instructions

List all actions performed on a specific load balancer, such as service changes and target attachments.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesLoad Balancer ID
pageNoPage number
sortNoSort field, e.g. "id:asc" or "name:desc"; pass an array for multiple sort fields
statusNoFilter by action status: "running", "success", or "error"; pass an array for multiple statuses
per_pageNoResults per page (max 50)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changedv3.0.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / sort / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "items": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "type": "array"
+  }
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / sort / description
      Previous value: -"Sort field, e.g. \"id:asc\" or \"name:desc\""New value: +"Sort field, e.g. \"id:asc\" or \"name:desc\"; pass an array for multiple sort fields"
    • removedInput schema / properties / sort / type
      Removed value: -"string"
    • addedInput schema / properties / status / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "items": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "type": "array"
+  }
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / status / description
      Previous value: -"Filter by action status: comma-separated list of \"running\", \"success\", \"error\""New value: +"Filter by action status: \"running\", \"success\", or \"error\"; pass an array for multiple statuses"
    • removedInput schema / properties / status / type
      Removed value: -"string"
  2. First observedv2.2.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context about what kinds of actions appear (service changes, target attachments), but does not disclose pagination behavior, filtering semantics, or authentication requirements beyond what annotations provide.

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?

The description is a single, well-formed sentence that front-loads the core purpose and includes a brief clarifying example. There is no redundant or wasted text.

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?

Given full schema coverage and rich annotations, the description is largely complete for a simple read-only list endpoint. It lacks any mention of return format or pagination, but with no output schema and a straightforward listing operation, those gaps are minor.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all five parameters (id, page, sort, status, per_page) are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning or constraints, which is acceptable 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.

Purpose5/5

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

The description states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('actions performed on a specific load balancer') and gives examples of action types. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling list-action tools for servers, networks, volumes, etc., because the resource is explicitly a load balancer.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies the tool is for listing load balancer actions, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives such as get_load_balancer, list_load_balancers, or wait_for_action. No exclusions or conditions are provided, leaving usage context to inference.

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