coolify_get_database_import

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

With no annotations, the description does add real behavioral context: a minimum server version and the required 'read:sensitive token ability', which affects whether a call can succeed. It does not cover what status values come back or whether the caller should poll, which matters for a status-check tool on an async import.

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?

Two short sentences with the resource and status qualifier front-loaded; nothing superfluous. The second sentence ('output needs the read:sensitive token ability') is grammatically rough but does carry useful information.

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 2-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the definition covers version and auth prerequisites but leaves the return shape and polling expectations unstated, which is a meaningful gap for a status-check endpoint on a long-running import.

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 both uuid and activity_id are already documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning about either parameter, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Get the status of a standalone database import', plus a version qualifier (Coolify v4.4+). The word 'standalone' implicitly separates it from coolify_get_service_database_import and from the mutating coolify_import_database, but neither sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: the schema note that activity_id is the 'Import ID returned when the import was started' hints this is called after coolify_import_database, but the description itself gives no when-to-use/when-not guidance or alternative routing.

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