Coolify: Delete application

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the description's main added value is the permanence statement and the enumeration of collateral cleanup targets. However, it says cleanup happens "optionally" when all four cleanup flags default to true in the schema, which understates that volumes, configs and networks are destroyed by default — a consequential detail an agent should not have to dig out of the schema.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and permanence warning before the optional cleanup note. The bracketed "[UNIFIED]" tag is the only wasted token.

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?

For a destructive, non-idempotent tool with zero schema description coverage and no output schema, the description is thin: no warning about irreversible cascading loss (volumes and networks default to deletion), no confirmation or auth expectations, and no coverage of docker_cleanup or the required identifiers.

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 description coverage is 0% across 6 parameters, so the description carries the full burden. It names three of the four optional cleanup flags (configs, volumes, networks) but omits docker_cleanup entirely, and gives no meaning for the two required parameters, site and uuid, leaving the agent to guess what "site" identifies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Delete a Coolify application") plus the scope qualifier "permanently", which separates it from coolify_stop_application and coolify_restart_application. The unexplained "[UNIFIED]" prefix adds noise but does not obscure the action.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance: nothing tells the agent to prefer stop_application when the app may be needed later, or how this relates to coolify_delete_application_env. The word "permanently" is a mild caution but not routing guidance, and no prerequisites (permissions, whether the app must be stopped first) are given.

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