MCP Hub

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Coolify: Create application compose

coolify_create_application_compose

Destructive

Create a Coolify Compose application; this endpoint is removed and every call fails, so use coolify_create_service for raw Compose or coolify_create_application_public with dockercompose.

Instructions

[UNIFIED] REMOVED by Coolify — this endpoint no longer exists and every call fails. Use coolify_create_service for raw Compose, or coolify_create_application_public with build_pack='dockercompose' for a git-backed Compose app.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "site": "<site>",
      "project_uuid": "<project_uuid>",
      "server_uuid": "<server_uuid>",
      "environment_name": "<environment_name>",
      "docker_compose_raw": "<docker_compose_raw>"
    },
    "name": "coolify_create_application_compose"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	No
`site`	Yes
`domains`	No
`description`	No
`server_uuid`	Yes
`project_uuid`	Yes
`ports_exposes`	No
`instant_deploy`	No
`environment_name`	Yes
`docker_compose_raw`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv3.14.0Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, but the description supplies the overriding behavioral fact that the endpoint is dead and every call fails, which no annotation conveys. It does not discuss side effects or error shape, but for a non-functional endpoint that detail is unnecessary rather than missing.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, with the deprecation notice front-loaded ahead of the routing guidance. Every clause carries actionable information.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a tool whose only remaining useful property is that it is non-functional, the description covers everything an agent needs: the failure guarantee and the correct replacements. No output schema exists, and return values are irrelevant for a call that always errors.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% across 10 parameters, and the description adds no meaning for any of them, including required fields like docker_compose_raw and environment_name. This is defensible given the tool always fails, but judged on its own the parameter documentation burden is entirely unmet.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states unambiguously that this specific endpoint was removed and that every invocation fails, which is the single most important fact about this tool. It also names the two sibling replacements, so an agent can distinguish it from coolify_create_application_public and coolify_create_service without inspecting any schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives explicit when-not-to-use ('this endpoint no longer exists') plus two concrete alternatives with the condition that selects each: coolify_create_service for raw Compose and coolify_create_application_public with build_pack='dockercompose' for git-backed Compose. Nothing is left to inference.

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

Deploy Server