coolify_list_application_scheduled_task_executions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The description correctly labels it as a list operation (non-destructive, read-only). However, it does not disclose any behavioral details such as pagination, ordering, filtering capabilities, or response format. For a basic list tool with no annotations, a score of 3 is appropriate—adequate but not informative.

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 captures the core functionality without any waste. It is front-loaded and efficient, earning its place with zero extraneous 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 required parameters, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is minimally complete. It communicates the basic function, but for a list tool, additional context about result ordering, limit, or update recency would be helpful. The lack of output schema means the description could have indicated the return type, which it does not.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters (uuid and task_uuid) with descriptions and constraints. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as how to obtain the UUIDs or their relationship. Baseline 3 is correct when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'List' and the resource 'executions of a scheduled task for a Coolify application'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like coolify_list_application_scheduled_tasks (which lists tasks themselves) and coolify_list_service_scheduled_task_executions (which targets services instead of applications). The purpose is specific and actionable.

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. While the sibling set includes similar tools for services and backup executions, there is no mention of prerequisites or conditions (e.g., requiring a valid application and task UUID). The agent must infer usage purely from the name and context, which is insufficient.

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