Deploy Application

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral context: it mutates (trigger deployment), force rebuild option, reveal secrets with audit warning, and instance safety note. This goes beyond annotations, though could mention asynchronous nature.

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 three concise, front-loaded sentences that cover the core purpose, deployment methods, and return value. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or fluff.

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 5 parameters (1 required) and no output schema, the description covers the main workflow: trigger deployment, specify apps, handle force/reveal, and track via UUID. It adequately informs the agent, though it could mention that deployments are asynchronous and how to check status (but returns UUID for tracking, so acceptable).

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 descriptions for all 5 parameters. The description adds value by reinforcing the mutual exclusivity of uuid and tag ('use this OR tag, not both') and providing real-world context for instance (Hetzner VPS vs OrbStack VM, safety warning). Baseline 3, elevated to 4 for this extra context.

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 specifies the action 'trigger a deployment' for applications, distinguishes between deploying by UUID or tag (group), and mentions returning a deployment UUID for tracking. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like coolify_cancel_deployment or coolify_get_deployment.

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 description explains when to use UUID vs tag ('tags let you deploy an entire group of apps at once') and provides explicit guidance on the required 'instance' parameter, including a warning against accidental prod writes. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool (e.g., for cancellation).

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