hcloud_server_attach_to_network_action

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses important behavior: an additional ethernet interface is added, an IP is auto-assigned from a subnet of type 'server' in the same network_zone, and alias IPs must be configured manually because only the primary IP is DHCP-provided. The operation-specific error table adds valuable failure-mode context.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core action, then adds concise behavioral notes and a scannable error table. Every section contributes useful information without redundant restatement.

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 mutating action tool with annotations, no output schema, and nested parameters, the description covers side effects, IP assignment rules, and known 422 errors well. It does not describe the returned action object or wait behavior, but the wait parameter is already documented in the schema.

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 67%, and the description meaningfully extends the schema for alias_ips by warning that those IPs must be configured manually on the server. It also reinforces auto-assignment semantics for IPs and subnet zones, though some nested parameter details remain schema-only.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Attach a Server to a Network') and explains the resulting interface/network relationship. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling detach or load-balancer attach tools.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb and the note that it complements the fixed public interface, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus hcloud_server_detach_from_network_action or hcloud_load_balancer_attach_to_network_action. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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