hcloud_get_zone_action

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuinely important behavioral trait the annotations cannot express: the endpoint is deprecated as of 2026-04-30. It stops short of naming the replacement endpoint, which would have made this 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?

Very short and front-loaded: the deprecation warning appears before the functional sentence, so an agent reading top-down sees the caveat first. The markdown header and link formatting are slightly noisy but cost little.

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 read-only single-resource fetch with full schema coverage and no output schema, most of what an agent needs is present. The notable gap is that the deprecation is announced without an in-context replacement, leaving the agent without an actionable migration path.

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 id_or_name, action_id, and the wait/polling flag are all documented in the schema. The description adds no meaning beyond that, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the work.

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 and resource: returns a single specific Action for a Zone, as opposed to listing them. This separates it from hcloud_list_zone_actions and hcloud_get_zones_actions_id, though it never names those siblings explicitly or explains how the 'specific by action_id' variant differs from the collection endpoints.

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 deprecation banner implies 'prefer something else', but the replacement is left as an external changelog link, so an agent gets no in-description guidance on when to use this versus hcloud_get_action or hcloud_list_zone_actions. Usage is only implied by the resource-specific naming.

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