coolify_list_github_apps

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states 'List all GitHub App integrations'. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the tool is read-only, whether it returns paginated results, authentication needs, or response format. This leaves the agent to infer behavior from naming alone.

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 unnecessary words. It efficiently communicates the tool's purpose without extra detail.

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 list tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It tells the agent exactly what this tool does. However, it could be improved by noting the return type (e.g., array of GitHub App objects) or read-only nature.

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 input schema is fully covered. The description does not need to add parameter meaning. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, which is appropriate here.

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 is clear and specific: verb 'List', resource 'GitHub App integrations', scope 'configured in Coolify'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like coolify_create_github_app, coolify_update_github_app, and other list tools for different resource types.

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 basic purpose but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., coolify_list_github_app_repositories). For a simple list tool, the absence of when-not or alternative references is acceptable but not excellent.

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