hcloud_get_action

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — notably it never mentions that `wait` defaults to true and will poll until success/error or timeout, which is the one behavior an agent most needs to anticipate (blocking, latency).

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?

It is short and front-loaded, but the second sentence merely repeats the first in passive form, so the only two sentences in a two-line description are redundant. Brevity here reflects lack of content rather than discipline.

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?

With no output schema, the description should say something about the returned Action object (fields, status values) and about the default polling behavior of `wait`. Instead it leaves an agent guessing on both, which is inadequate for a tool whose main behavior is a blocking poll.

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% and both parameters (id, wait) are documented in the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description mentions no parameter semantics at all — not even that IDs are global action IDs rather than resource-scoped.

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?

"Get an Action / Returns a specific Action object" restates the tool name and title without adding specificity. It gives no way to distinguish this generic action getter from the many sibling getters (hcloud_get_server_action, hcloud_get_load_balancer_action, hcloud_get_certificates_actions_id, hcloud_list_actions) that also return Action objects.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus hcloud_list_actions or the resource-scoped action getters, and no mention of the relationship to hcloud_wait_action. The agent must infer all routing decisions from tool names alone.

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