coolify_trigger_deploy

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. The [WRITE] prefix indicates a mutation, but the description does not disclose side effects (e.g., cancellation of ongoing deployments), idempotency, auth requirements, or whether the deployment is synchronous. The behavioral transparency is very limited.

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 with the [WRITE] prefix, which is efficient and front-loaded. It conveys the core action without fluff. However, it could be slightly more structured (e.g., listing resource types in a clearer way) without losing conciseness.

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 no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., deployment ID, status). It also lacks details on prerequisites (resource must exist), error handling, or concurrency behavior. With many siblings, it does not help differentiate from other management actions. The description is incomplete for a tool that triggers an asynchronous 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, meaning both parameters (uuid, force) are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline is 3, and no extra value is contributed.

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 'Trigger a new deployment' and specifies the resource types (application, service, or database). The [WRITE] prefix reinforces the action type. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like start/stop/restart which manage lifecycle but not deployments.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., start/stop/restart). The context is implied: trigger a deployment when you want to deploy a new version. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned. Minimal guidance.

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