Create Server

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read-only, non-idempotent operation. The description adds useful behavioral context: it returns the new server details including IP address and root password (if no SSH keys specified). However, it does not mention side effects like billing or provisioning time.

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 well-structured with required and optional sections, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and contains no filler. Every sentence adds value.

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?

While the schema fully documents all 8 parameters, the description omits response_format and start_after_create from its optional list, giving an incomplete picture of invocable parameters. It otherwise covers key aspects like return details and parameter discovery.

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 100%, but the description goes beyond schema by giving concrete examples ('cx22', 'ubuntu-24.04', 'fsn1') and referencing list tools to discover valid options. This significantly helps correct invocation.

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 starts with 'Create a new server,' which is a specific verb+resource. It clearly differentiates from sibling operations like reboot, power on/off, and delete. The scope of creating a server is unambiguous.

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 provides clear usage context by listing required vs optional parameters and pointing to sibling list tools (e.g., hetzner_list_server_types) for valid values. It does not explicitly state when not to use the tool, but for a create operation the guidance is sufficient.

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