Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
hetzner-mcp

hetzner-mcp

by mjmirza
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

cloud_list_dns_zones

List DNS zones from Hetzner Cloud for read-only access, with optional filters by name, labels, or ID to retrieve zone details.

Instructions

List DNS zones, part of the Cloud API. Read only.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "cloud_list_dns_zones"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoFetch one by id.
queryNoFilters, e.g. name, label_selector.
verboseNoFull payload.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv0.7.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"Optional resource id to fetch a single item."New value: +"Fetch one by id."
    • removedInput schema / properties / query / additionalProperties / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "number"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "boolean"
-  }
-]
    • addedInput schema / properties / query / additionalProperties / type
      Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "number",
+  "boolean"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / query / description
      Previous value: -"Optional query parameters such as name or label_selector."New value: +"Filters, e.g. name, label_selector."
    • changedInput schema / properties / verbose / description
      Previous value: -"Return full payload instead of the compact view."New value: +"Full payload."
  2. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Read only' is a genuine behavioral disclosure that a safe read is being performed, but for a list tool it omits pagination behavior, result limits, default filtering, and authentication/permission requirements — all material to correct invocation.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with zero filler. It is efficient, though the extreme brevity is arguably under-specification rather than tight editing.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a zero-required-parameter list tool with fully documented schema fields and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. An agent can call it, but gets no return-shape or pagination expectations and no guidance on the nested 'query' filter semantics, which the description should supply.

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 description coverage is 100% (id, query, verbose are all documented inline), so the baseline is 3. The description adds nothing about the parameters — notably it does not explain the interaction of 'id' (single fetch) with list behavior or the shape of the 'query' filter object.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ('List DNS zones'), which is enough to distinguish it from the volume, network, firewall and image list siblings by resource noun. However, it gives no scope detail (e.g. project/region filtering) to separate it from a hypothetical filtered variant, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative. 'Read only' hints at the safety profile but does not tell the agent when this tool is the right choice versus, say, a single-zone fetch via the id parameter.

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