coolify_login_server_registry

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden; it does add substantive behavior: that Coolify executes docker login on the target server and does not persist the token. Still missing whether an existing login is overwritten, how failures surface, and whether credentials are validated.

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?

Two tightly written sentences; the mutating nature and version constraint are front-loaded and nothing is redundant.

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?

With four required params, no annotations, and no output schema, the definition covers the essential mechanics but leaves the response behavior and failure modes unaddressed; an agent knows what it does but not what it gets back.

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 per-property descriptions (uuid, registry host format, username, password/token), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no per-parameter meaning beyond what is already structured, making baseline 3 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?

States a concrete verb and resource ("Log a server in to a Docker registry") plus the update-login variant and a version note. The verb naturally separates it from the sibling coolify_logout_server_registry and coolify_check_server_registry without ambiguity.

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 mutating verb and the [WRITE] tag, and the Coolify v4.4+ note hints at applicability, but the description never states when to pick this over check/logout or what preconditions exist (e.g., registry reachable from the server). No explicit exclusions.

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