coolify_list_service_storages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the listing action and includes sub-resource UUIDs, but omits critical behavioral traits such as read-only semantics, permission requirements, error handling (e.g., missing service), or pagination behavior. The description is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 sentence of 13 words, front-loading the key action and resource. It is efficient and free of unnecessary words. While it could be more structured, it earns a 4 for being concise and direct.

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 has one required parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is somewhat incomplete. It hints at the output (includes sub-resource UUIDs) but does not explain the return format, error conditions, or prerequisites. For a simple list tool, it just meets the minimum adequacy.

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?

The input schema already provides full coverage for the single parameter 'uuid' with a description ('UUID of the service'). The description adds no additional meaning for the parameter beyond mentioning 'sub-resource UUIDs', which relates to the output not the input. Baseline 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 clearly states the verb 'list' and the resource 'storages for a Coolify service', with the additional detail about including sub-resource UUIDs. This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like coolify_list_application_storages and coolify_list_database_storages, which target different entity 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 implicitly indicates when to use the tool (to list storages for a service), but it does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or compare it to alternative tools like coolify_list_application_storages for application-level storage listing. No when-to-use or when-not-to-use criteria are given.

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