hcloud_server_enable_backup_action

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, non-destructive, openWorld behavior, so the description is free to add cost and capacity context, which it does: a 20% price increase and seven backup image slots, plus daily creation cadence. It does not say what happens if backups are already enabled or what resource is returned, so it stops short of 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?

The lead sentence is a clear front-loaded summary and the pricing and slots detail is the useful payload. There is mild redundancy between the title and the first sentence ('Enables and configures... Enable and configure'), which keeps it from 5.

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 annotations covering safety semantics and full schema coverage, the description supplies the missing commercial and retention context (20% cost, 7 slots, daily cadence). The one gap is the response shape, since there is no output schema and the description does not say an action is returned, though the 'wait' parameter hints at an async action.

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 parameters (id and the wait polling flag) are already self-documenting; the description adds nothing about them. Baseline 3 is correct when the schema carries the load.

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 names a specific verb pair (enable and configure) and a precise resource (a Server's automatic daily backup option). An agent can distinguish this from hcloud_server_disable_backup_action and hcloud_server_backup (which creates a backup now) without inspecting either 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?

The description implies usage (turn on automatic daily backups) and states the tradeoff, but never explicitly says when to prefer this over hcloud_server_backup or hcloud_server_disable_backup_action, and no prerequisites (server state, permissions) are given. The correct tool is inferable but not routed.

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