hcloud_certificate_retry_action

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: the state preconditions and a table of operation-specific errors (e.g. `dns_zone_not_found`, `caa_record_does_not_allow_ca`) that tell the agent what failure outcomes mean. It does not describe whether a successful retry mutates the certificate's status or how the action is queued, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Purpose and preconditions are front-loaded in the first two sentences, which is ideal. The error table adds bulk, but it is structured and directly relevant to diagnosing retry failures rather than filler.

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 mutation tool with no output schema and fully covered parameters, the description supplies the key operational constraint (managed + failed) and the known error surface. What's missing is minor: no statement of required permissions or what the returned action represents, but nothing critical for correct invocation is absent.

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%, so both `id` and `wait` are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb ('Retry') and resource ('Certificate issuance or renewal') with the exact scope of the operation. An agent can distinguish this from sibling tools like hcloud_get_certificate_action or hcloud_update_certificate without opening any schema.

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?

Provides explicit preconditions: only applicable when the Certificate type is `managed` and the issuance/renewal status is `failed`. This is a clear when-to-use gate that prevents misuse, even though it doesn't name an alternative sibling for the non-failed case.

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