coolify_delete_project

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

The description lacks any behavioral details beyond the action itself. There is no annotation provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose that deletion is destructive, whether it cascades to resources, or whether authorization is required. This is a critical gap for a destructive operation.

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 extremely concise (3 words), which avoids verbosity but at the cost of being under-informative. It is front-loaded but does not earn its place due to lack of detail. A slightly longer description would be more helpful without being excessive.

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 destructive nature of the tool and the absence of annotations or output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain consequences (e.g., whether the deletion is irreversible, or if associated resources are affected). An agent cannot fully assess the impact of invoking this tool.

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%, and the parameter 'uuid' is described in the schema as 'Project UUID'. The description adds no additional meaning, so it scores at the baseline for high coverage. No extra context is provided to clarify the source or format of the UUID.

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 explicitly states 'Delete a project', clearly identifying the verb (delete) and the resource (project). However, it does not distinguish this tool from siblings such as coolify_update_project or coolify_create_project, which could confuse an agent deciding among them.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like coolify_get_project (for inspection) or coolify_update_project (for modification). There is no context about prerequisites, such as whether the project must be empty before deletion.

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