Skip to main content
Glama
GoCoder7
by GoCoder7

coolify_system_management

Manage Coolify self-hosted instances by listing servers, teams, and services, or testing system connectivity for deployment oversight.

Instructions

System management: list servers, teams, services, or test connectivity

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionYesAction to perform: get servers, teams, services, or test connection

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function that implements the tool logic. It processes the input action and calls appropriate Coolify API methods (getServers, getTeams, getServices, testConnection), formats the response as MCP content, and handles errors.
    export async function handleSystemManagement(
      coolifyClient: CoolifyApiClient,
      args: any
    ): Promise<any> {
      try {
        const { action } = args;
        let result;
        let message;
    
        switch (action) {
          case 'get_servers':
            result = await coolifyClient.getServers();
            message = `Found ${result.length} servers`;
            break;
    
          case 'get_teams':
            result = await coolifyClient.getTeams();
            message = `Found ${result.length} teams`;
            break;
    
          case 'get_services':
            result = await coolifyClient.getServices();
            message = `Found ${result.length} services`;
            break;
    
          case 'test_connection':
            result = await coolifyClient.testConnection();
            message = result ? 'Connection successful' : 'Connection failed';
            break;
    
          default:
            throw new Error(`Unknown system action: ${action}`);
        }
    
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: 'text',
              text: JSON.stringify({
                success: true,
                data: result,
                message: message
              }, null, 2)
            }
          ]
        };
      } catch (error) {
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: 'text',
              text: JSON.stringify({
                success: false,
                error: error instanceof Error ? error.message : 'Unknown error occurred'
              }, null, 2)
            }
          ],
          isError: true
        };
      }
    }
  • Tool definition including name, description, and input schema specifying the required 'action' parameter with allowed values.
    export const systemManagementTool: Tool = {
      name: 'coolify_system_management',
      description: 'System management: list servers, teams, services, or test connectivity',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          action: {
            type: 'string',
            enum: ['get_servers', 'get_teams', 'get_services', 'test_connection'],
            description: 'Action to perform: get servers, teams, services, or test connection',
          },
        },
        required: ['action'],
      },
    };
  • src/index.ts:156-157 (registration)
    Registration of the tool handler in the MCP server's CallToolRequestSchema switch statement, dispatching calls to handleSystemManagement.
    case 'coolify_system_management':
      return await handleSystemManagement(this.coolifyClient, args);
  • src/index.ts:127-130 (registration)
    Tool registration in the ListToolsRequestSchema response, including systemManagementTool in the available tools list.
    tools: [
      applicationManagementTool,
      environmentConfigurationTool,
      systemManagementTool,
  • src/index.ts:44-47 (registration)
    Import of the tool definition and handler from the system-unified module.
    import {
      systemManagementTool,
      handleSystemManagement,
    } from './tools/system-unified';
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies read-only operations for listing and testing, but doesn't specify if these actions require authentication, have rate limits, or what the output format might be. For a system management tool, this lack of detail is a significant gap.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded, using a single sentence with zero waste. It efficiently communicates the core functionality without unnecessary words, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity of system management and the lack of annotations or output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral aspects like authentication needs, error handling, or return values, which are crucial for an agent to use the tool effectively in a real-world context.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, clearly documenting the single 'action' parameter with an enum. The description adds minimal value by listing the actions in a more readable format ('list servers, teams, services, or test connectivity'), but doesn't provide additional context or syntax details beyond what the schema already specifies.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose with specific verbs ('list', 'test') and resources ('servers', 'teams', 'services', 'connectivity'), making it easy to understand what it does. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'coolify_application_management' or 'coolify_environment_configuration', which might have overlapping functions.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lists possible actions but doesn't specify contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the action names alone without reference to sibling tools.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/GoCoder7/coolify-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server