coolify_list_resources

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It indicates this is a read-only operation ('List'), which is transparent. However, it does not disclose any additional side effects, output format, or pagination behavior. It is adequate but not rich.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes a parenthetical listing of resource types. Every word serves a purpose with no filler.

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 that there are no parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and the tool is a straightforward list operation, the description covers the essential semantics. It could mention whether the output is paginated or ordered, but for such a simple tool, the current level is nearly complete.

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% with zero parameters, so there are no parameters for the description to explain. The description correctly sets no expectations about parameters. The baseline of 4 is appropriate given there is nothing to add.

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', the resource 'all resources', and specifies what those resources include (applications, databases, services), and the scope 'across all projects'. This distinguishes it well from sibling tools like coolify_list_applications, coolify_list_databases, and coolify_list_projects, which are more specific.

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 implies a broad, unfiltered listing purpose—getting a comprehensive overview. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the sibling tool list makes it self-evident that more specific list tools exist for filtered views. It lacks explicit exclusions but offers clear context.

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