coolify_create_application_docker_compose

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The description only states the basic action without disclosing any behavioral traits such as required permissions, impact on existing resources, whether it's a safe operation, or what the response contains. This is insufficient for an agent to understand side effects.

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 a single, short sentence, making it very concise. It gets straight to the point, but lacks any structured breakdown of usage or parameters. While concise, it sacrifices helpful detail.

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?

Given the tool has 6 parameters, 4 required, and no output schema, the description is severely lacking. It does not explain what happens after creation, how to handle errors, or any post-creation steps. The context of the sibling tools suggests this is part of a larger API, but the description alone is not sufficient for an agent to use it correctly without additional knowledge.

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?

All parameters are described in the schema (100% coverage), which is the baseline. The description itself adds no additional context about the parameters beyond the tool's overall purpose. It does not explain how parameters like project_uuid or server_uuid should be obtained or formatted.

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 tool's purpose: creating an application using Docker Compose. It distinguishes this from other creation methods (e.g., from public repo, private repo, etc.) by specifying 'Docker Compose'. This provides a specific verb-resource-method combination.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus the other application creation tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, context for use, or when not to use it. The agent would need to infer from the parameter names, but explicit guidance is missing.

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