Skip to main content
Glama
0xtlt

coolify-mcp

by 0xtlt
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

coolify_update_application_storage

[WRITE] Update a persistent or file storage for a Coolify application (PATCH body includes storage uuid + type)

Instructions

[WRITE] Update a persistent or file storage for a Coolify application (PATCH body includes storage uuid + type)

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoVolume name (persistent only)
typeYesStorage type: persistent volume or file mount
uuidYesUUID of the application
contentNoFile content (file only)
host_pathNoUnsupported by current Coolify; mount sources cannot be updated
mount_pathNoContainer mount path
storage_uuidYesUUID of the storage to update
is_preview_suffix_enabledNoAdd -pr-N suffix for preview deployments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv4.3.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / content / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
    • addedInput schema / properties / content / type
      Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
    • removedInput schema / properties / host_path / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
    • addedInput schema / properties / host_path / type
      Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv4.1.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / host_path / description
      Previous value: -"Host path (persistent only)"New value: +"Unsupported by current Coolify; mount sources cannot be updated"
  3. First observedv4.0.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It usefully flags '[WRITE]' and notes the PATCH body includes storage uuid + type, disclosing mutation behavior. However, it does not mention permissions, partial-update semantics, irreversibility, or side effects, leaving significant behavioral context uncovered.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted language. The '[WRITE]' marker and parenthetical detail are compact and directly useful.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The input schema is fully documented, but the tool has no annotations and no output schema. For an 8-parameter mutation tool, the description covers the core action but omits safety, return behavior, and operational caveats that would make it complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description only restates that storage_uuid and type are in the PATCH body and adds no syntax or behavioral meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb ('Update') and resource ('persistent or file storage for a Coolify application'), making the tool's purpose clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling create/delete/list storage tools, but the name plus 'Update' is sufficient to differentiate.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as create_application_storage or delete_application_storage. The '[WRITE]' tag implies mutation but does not explain when this tool should be selected over related storage operations.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools