List Coolify GitHub Apps

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds context on return fields but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like pagination or quota limits. With annotations, a score of 3 is appropriate as it adds some context beyond annotations.

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 concise sentences. First sentence states purpose and output fields. Second sentence provides usage guidance. No unnecessary words, efficient and front-loaded.

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?

The description adequately covers the tool's purpose, output, and usage differentiation. No output schema exists, but the mention of return fields compensates. Could mention whether the list includes all GitHub apps or has pagination, but for a straightforward list tool it is sufficient.

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 has 100% coverage with all three parameters described in the schema. The description does not provide additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already offers. Baseline score of 3 is correct.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'GitHub-App source integrations in Coolify'. It specifies the return fields: 'id, uuid, name, organization'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like coolify_get_github_app for full details and coolify_create_github_app for creation.

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 explicitly recommends 'Use coolify_get_github_app for full detail' when more information is needed. However, it does not mention when not to use it or provide alternatives for filtering, but the context is clear for its listing purpose.

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