coolify_update_instance_email_settings

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it does disclose the [WRITE] nature, the elevated auth requirement, and the important null-clears-a-field semantics, which are genuine behavioral signals. It omits whether omitted fields are left unchanged (0 required params makes this critical), whether SMTP and Resend settings interact, and whether existing config is overwritten.

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 tight sentences with the [WRITE] marker and key constraint front-loaded; no filler, and the null rule is placed where it is needed.

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?

For a 12-parameter mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description says too little about partial-update semantics, field interactions, and effect on live instance email delivery. It is directionally correct but not complete enough to call the tool confidently.

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 0% across 12 parameters, so the description must compensate. 'Null clears a field' usefully explains the anyOf-null pattern, but nothing explains smtp_* vs resend_* selection, smtp_enabled/resend_enabled roles, encryption enum choices, or what omitting a parameter does.

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?

Names a specific verb (update) and a specific resource (instance-wide SMTP/Resend settings), and the [WRITE] tag plus version marker makes the scope unambiguous. It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling read counterpart coolify_get_instance_email_settings.

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 'instance-wide' and the prerequisite ('root-team admin/owner token with write:sensitive ability') tells the agent whether it can call it at all. But there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over the read tool, nor any note on partial vs. full updates.

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