Skip to main content
Glama
mjmirza

hetzner-mcp

by mjmirza
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Create a cloud server

cloud_create_server

Create a Hetzner Cloud server with live pricing, requiring confirmation. Optionally attach SSH keys, networks, firewalls, and cloud-init.

Instructions

Create a Hetzner Cloud server. This is billed. It requires confirm true and shows the live hourly and monthly price first. Optionally attach SSH keys, a private network, firewalls, cloud-init user_data, and labels.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesServer name.
imageYesFor example ubuntu-24.04. List options with cloud_list_images.
labelsNoKey value labels.
confirmNoMust be true. Creating a server costs money.
locationNoFor example nbg1, fsn1, hel1.
networksNoPrivate network ids to attach.
ssh_keysNoSSH key ids or names.
firewallsNoFirewall ids to apply.
user_dataNocloud-init user data run at first boot.
server_typeYesFor example cx23 or cax21. List options with cloud_list_server_types.
start_after_createNoStart the server after creation. Default true.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.7.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / ssh_keys / items / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "number"
-  }
-]
    • addedInput schema / properties / ssh_keys / items / type
      Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "number"
+]
  2. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does well: it discloses that the operation is billed, requires confirm=true, and previews live hourly/monthly pricing before committing. It stops short of covering auth requirements, failure/reversibility behavior, or what is returned.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three tight sentences, zero waste, with the cost/confirm constraint front-loaded before the optional-parameter list. Every sentence earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For an 11-param mutating tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the critical cost and confirm gate plus the optional attachments. Remaining gaps (return value shape, error behavior) are less essential given a rich schema, but not fully closed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 11 parameters thoroughly. The description restates the optional attachment params (SSH keys, network, firewalls, user_data, labels) but adds no format or syntax beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ("Create a Hetzner Cloud server") that unambiguously distinguishes it from the many sibling creation tools like cloud_create_volume or cloud_create_network without needing the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It surfaces a key usage prerequisite (confirm must be true, operation is billed, price shown first), but gives no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or alternatives relative to siblings. Usage is implied rather than framed.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools