List Primary IP Actions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the agent knows it's safe. The description adds no additional behavioral traits (e.g., pagination behavior, rate limits). Since annotations cover the safety profile, the description is adequate but not enriched.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the verb 'List', and efficiently covers purpose and examples. No wasted words.

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?

The description does not explain the output structure (list of action objects), which is useful given no output schema. It mentions example actions but lacks details like pagination or result format. Adequate for a simple list tool but could be more complete.

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 coverage is 100% with clear parameter descriptions. The tool description mentions example actions (assign, unassign, rDNS), which provides context for the output but does not enhance parameter meaning. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool lists actions on a specific primary IP, providing examples like assign, unassign, and rDNS changes. The verb 'list' and resource 'primary IP' are specific and distinguish it from sibling tools such as hetzner_list_floating_ip_actions.

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 description offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like hetzner_list_floating_ip_actions or hetzner_list_server_actions. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or context for selection.

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