coolify_list_application_previews

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the Coolify version requirement and the summary fields returned, but omits pagination behavior, authentication requirements, failure modes, and explicit confirmation that the operation is read-only.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The version requirement and return summary are compactly placed in parentheses after the core purpose.

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 simple one-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description supplies useful return-field context and a version constraint. It is nearly complete, but the absence of pagination or authorization notes leaves a minor gap.

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 the single uuid parameter is already documented in the schema as the parent application UUID. The description adds no additional semantics about the parameter, so the baseline score 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 names a specific verb ('List') and resource ('preview deployments of an application'), making the tool's scope clear. It implicitly distinguishes itself from deployment-listing siblings by specifying 'preview', but does not explicitly name an alternative sibling for contrast.

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 implied by the purpose: an agent can infer this tool should be used when preview deployments for an application are needed. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no comparison to siblings like coolify_list_application_deployments or coolify_get_application_preview.

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