coolify_run_service_storage_backup

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. The '[WRITE]' prefix and 'Run' verb indicate a mutating operation, but the description does not state whether this triggers an immediate execution, whether it requires the system to be in a certain state, or what side effects occur (e.g., backups overwrite or append). It is adequate but lacks detail.

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 short and front-loaded with the action and intent. It uses a single sentence that conveys the core purpose without unnecessary words. The '[WRITE]' prefix is a useful signal for the agent. It could be slightly more precise but is well-structured.

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 2 well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate for basic usage. However, it does not explain what happens after triggering the backup (e.g., whether it returns success/failure, or requires polling), or how it relates to backup schedules. It falls short of being fully self-contained for a complex operation.

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 has 100% description coverage with two parameters ('uuid' and 'storage_uuid'), each well-documented with patterns and lengths. The description states 'for a service storage' which clarifies that 'storage_uuid' refers to a specific storage entity. While the description does not add much beyond the schema, the schema itself is clear, earning a score above baseline.

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 uses a specific verb ('Run') and resource ('on-demand backup for a service storage'), clearly stating what the tool does. It is distinguished from siblings like coolify_set_service_storage_backup and coolify_delete_service_storage_backup by the 'run' action, but could be more explicit about the scope.

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 '[WRITE]' prefix hints that this is a mutation tool, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., coolify_list_backup_executions for monitoring, coolify_set_service_storage_backup for configuration). No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned. The context of on-demand backups is implied but not elaborated.

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