coolify_get_instance_email_settings

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses authentication requirements and the need for elevated permissions for secrets, which goes beyond the obvious 'get' semantics. It doesn't mention side effects, but as a read operation the name implies none. The addition of the version and auth conditions adds useful behavioral context.

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 succinct sentences that lead with the action and resource, then add the necessary auth context. No wasted words, and the information is front-loaded.

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 parameterless getter with no output schema, the description covers everything needed: what it retrieves, the required permissions, and the version. The simple nature of the tool means no further details are necessary.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the description has no need to explain them. The description does mention 'secrets' which could relate to the response data rather than parameters, but this is acceptable given the empty schema. The baseline for no parameters is 4.

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 specific verb 'Get', the resource 'instance-wide SMTP/Resend settings', and even includes the Coolify version. It implicitly distinguishes from the sibling 'coolify_update_instance_email_settings' by using 'get' vs 'update', making the purpose 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?

It provides the prerequisite access token requirement (root-team admin/owner) and the additional ability needed for secrets, which is valuable context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus the update sibling, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternatives. The usage guidance is implied by the tool name but not directly stated.

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