Coolify: List backup executions

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

readOnlyHint=true already covers the safety profile, so the description only needed to add scoping or result behavior. It adds the scoping ('of one scheduled backup of one database') but says nothing about volume, ordering, pagination, or whether a backup with no runs returns an empty list or an error. For a read-only listing tool with no output schema, that leaves the agent guessing at the return shape.

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 what is listed and followed by the prerequisite. No padding or redundant restatement of the title. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix consumes space without conveying anything actionable to an agent.

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?

With three required, undocumented parameters and no output schema, this definition should specify what an execution record looks like and which identifier is which. Neither is present, so an agent could easily pass the wrong UUID type to the wrong field. The readOnly annotation handles safety, but the invocation-critical gaps remain.

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% for three required parameters, so the description carries the full burden and does not meet it. It never distinguishes the generic 'uuid' from 'scheduled_backup_uuid'; an agent cannot tell from the text whether 'uuid' is the database UUID, the backup config UUID, or something else. Only scheduled_backup_uuid's provenance is hinted at via the sibling tool.

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: list executions of one scheduled backup belonging to one database. That is clearly distinct from siblings like coolify_get_database_backups or coolify_list_deployments. It stops short of 5 because it never says what an 'execution' contains (run status, timestamps, logs), which is the one thing that would fully pin the concept down.

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?

The sentence 'Get the scheduled backup UUID from coolify_get_database_backups' documents a prerequisite dependency, which is genuinely useful for calling the tool correctly. However, it gives no when-to-use versus when-not guidance and no alternatives for inspecting backup history or outcomes. Usage is implied by the workflow chain rather than stated.

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