coolify_create_project

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. 'Create' implies a mutation (write operation), but it doesn't mention whether the tool has side effects like auto-assigning IDs, creating default environments, or requiring specific permissions. There's no statement about the return value or error behavior.

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 very short (one sentence fragment), which is concise but not necessarily well-structured. The '[WRITE]' prefix is unnecessary and adds clutter without value. It could front-load with a more informative verb phrase or omit the prefix entirely.

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?

Given 2 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and vast sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the project concept, confirm that projects are containers for applications/databases, or hint at the expected output (e.g., created project ID/name). An agent might not understand the role of this tool in the Coldify workflow.

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%, so the description's lack of parameter details is partially excused. The input schema already documents 'name' (required, project name) and 'description' (optional, project description). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, but the schema is self-sufficient.

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 states the action ('Create') and resource ('a new Coolify project'), which is clear. However, the '[WRITE]' prefix is redundant with the verb 'Create' and doesn't help differentiate this tool from other creation tools like 'coolify_create_application' or 'coolify_create_database'. It's adequate but not explicit about what a 'project' is in Coolify's context.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool over alternatives like 'coolify_update_project' or 'coolify_create_environment'. It also lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., whether a team or server must exist first) or that it's typically the first step before creating applications or databases within the project.

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