hcloud_server_detach_from_network_action

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the agent knows this is a mutating, outward-facing action. The description usefully adds that the network interface vanishes, but omits what is lost (private IPs, connectivity), whether the call is reversible, and how the 'wait' polling behaves.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the operation name before the consequence. Nothing is wasted, though the second sentence could be merged for tighter structure.

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 destructive action with no output schema and a nested body parameter, the description is thin: it doesn't say that an action object is returned, what the wait flag does, or what happens to addresses/services on the removed interface. The annotations cover the safety profile, but the operational contract is largely left to 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 coverage is 67% and the description adds no meaning for any of the three parameters — server id, nested body.network, or the wait flag. The nested request object in particular would benefit from a clarifying note that the network ID is required and distinct from the server ID.

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+resource ('Detach a Server from a Network'), which is unambiguous and distinguishable from the attach counterpart by name. It doesn't explicitly contrast itself with hcloud_server_attach_to_network_action or the load balancer detach sibling, but the operation is clear from the name alone.

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?

No indication of when to use this versus the attach tool or other network actions, and no prerequisites (the Server must actually be attached, the network must exist, whether the Server must be powered off). The one added sentence describes the outcome, not the usage condition.

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