Coolify MCP Server

list-applications

Fetch all applications managed by Coolify to view deployed services and monitor your application inventory.

Instructions

Fetch a list of all applications currently managed by Coolify. This provides an overview of all deployed applications.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list-applications"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedAug 18, 2025

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states this fetches a list but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it returns all applications at once (vs paginated), what fields are included, if it requires authentication, or potential rate limits. The description is minimal and lacks operational context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two concise sentences that directly state what the tool does. It's front-loaded with the core action and avoids fluff. However, it could be slightly more structured by explicitly mentioning it's a read-only operation or contrasting with siblings.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the returned list contains (e.g., application names, IDs, statuses), how results are formatted, or any limitations. For a list tool with multiple siblings, more context is needed to guide effective use.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters, maintaining focus on the tool's purpose. Baseline is 4 for zero parameters, as it avoids unnecessary detail.

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 action ('Fetch a list') and resource ('applications currently managed by Coolify'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this from sibling tools like 'get-application' or 'list-deployments', which would require more specific scope clarification.

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 like 'get-application' (for details of a single application) or 'list-deployments' (for deployment history). It mentions 'overview of all deployed applications' but doesn't specify use cases or exclusions.

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

Deploy Server