coolify_delete_database_storage

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

The description explicitly marks the tool as '[DESTRUCTIVE]', which is helpful for behavioral transparency. With no annotations provided, this is a positive disclosure. However, it does not explain what happens after deletion (e.g., whether it's permanent, if confirmation is required, or if it affects running databases). The presence of a 'confirm' parameter is implied by the behavior but not explicitly stated in the description.

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, concise sentence that takes about 15 words to convey the core purpose. The '[DESTRUCTIVE]' tag at the start provides immediate warning. It is front-loaded and to the point. While it could include a bit more guidance, it does not waste 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?

Given that there is no output schema, the description should compensate by explaining what the tool returns upon success or failure (e.g., confirmation message, error if storage not found). It also lacks any mention of error states, idempotency (e.g., deleting already-deleted storage), or dependencies (e.g., backup relationships). For a destructive tool with no annotations or output schema, this is inadequate.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters adequately. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. The tool name and description implicitly clarify that 'uuid' is the database's UUID and 'storage_uuid' is the storage to delete, but 'confirm' is only documented in the schema. With full schema coverage, 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 clearly states the verb ('Remove'), resource ('persistent or file storage mount'), and target ('from a Coolify database'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like `coolify_delete_application_storage`, `coolify_delete_service_storage`, and `coolify_delete_database_storage_backup` by specifying it targets database storage mounts. However, it could be more precise by noting it deletes a specific storage UUID rather than all storage for a database.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Among siblings, `coolify_list_database_storages` lists available storages, `coolify_create_database_storage` creates them, and `coolify_update_database_storage` modifies them, but no mention is made of prerequisites (e.g., listing storages first to get the storage_uuid) or when not to use it (e.g., if storage is in use by backups). The description assumes the agent already knows the context.

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