coolify_create_service_env

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavior. It correctly states this is a write operation but does not mention whether updating an existing key overwrites, what the return value is, whether the operation is idempotent, or any side effects (e.g., triggering a redeploy). The description does not contradict anything since there are no annotations, but it is insufficient for understanding behavioral implications.

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 a single sentence that clearly states the action and target. It is appropriately concise with no wasted words.

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?

For a tool that creates an environment variable with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It tells the agent the basic action and target, but does not explain what happens after creation (e.g., does the service restart?), nor does it clarify the role of optional parameters like 'is_literal' or 'is_preview' beyond the schema. With no annotation support, more context is warranted.

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%, and all 3 required parameters have clear schema descriptions. The description adds only the tool-level context that this is an environment variable for a service, but does not add meaning beyond the schema. Since coverage is high, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 '[WRITE]' which signals it's a mutation, but then says 'Create a new environment variable for a Coolify service'. While 'Create' and '[WRITE]' are consistent, the description does not differentiate this tool from 'coolify_create_env' which does the same for applications, not services. Without specifying that this targets services, the agent may confuse it with the generic environment variable creation tool.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'coolify_create_env' (for applications) or 'coolify_create_database_env'. The description does not mention prerequisites (e.g., the service must exist), nor does it specify when not to use it. This is a critical gap given the large number of sibling tools.

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