Update Service Environment Variable

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

Annotations already provide idempotent and non-destructive hints. The description adds that the tool updates only existing variables matched by key name, which is useful but doesn't go beyond the annotations' baseline.

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?

Three concise sentences, each with clear value: action and resource, matching detail, and usage context. No redundant words.

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 tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description covers core functionality and context. Minor gap: no mention of potential side effects (e.g., triggering a deployment), but the schema fills most gaps.

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?

With 100% schema parameter description coverage, the description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema—only relating 'key' matching behavior. The description does not elaborate on other parameters like 'reveal' or boolean flags.

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 'Update' and the resource 'existing environment variable on a Coolify service', specifying 'Flavor C / docker-compose apps' and matching by key name. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like coolify_update_app_env for app-level variables.

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 gives a clear use case: 'Use for multi-container compose services'. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives for other service types, which would strengthen the guideline.

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