Coolify: Get environment

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

With readOnlyHint=true supplied, the safety profile is already covered by annotations. The description adds only the lookup scope ('in a Coolify project by name'), and says nothing about what happens when the environment is not found, what detail is returned, or whether 'site' affects which Coolify instance is queried.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix carries little information for an agent, but the sentence itself is efficient.

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 simple three-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, with 0% schema coverage and an unexplained 'site' parameter, an agent would have to guess at input semantics and return shape.

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%, so all three parameters (site, project_uuid, environment_name) are undocumented in structured fields. The description only clarifies that environment_name is a name and is scoped to a project; it gives no meaning for 'site' or the uuid format, leaving the schema gap unaddressed.

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 uses a specific verb+resource ('Get details of a specific environment') and scopes it to a Coolify project by name. It is distinguishable from siblings like coolify_create_environment and coolify_get_project, though it never explicitly points to an alternative or contrast.

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. The description does not tell the agent whether there is a list-environments tool, whether project_uuid is required to disambiguate, or when to choose this over coolify_get_project.

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