Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP Hub

MCP Hub

by airano-ir
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Coolify: List environments

coolify_list_environments
Read-only

List all environments in a Coolify project to review deployment targets and stage settings. Use the site and project UUID to retrieve environment names and details.

Instructions

[UNIFIED] List all environments in a Coolify project.

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>"
    },
    "name": "coolify_list_environments"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteYes
project_uuidYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv3.14.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The readOnlyHint=true annotation already establishes this is a safe read. The description adds nothing beyond that: no pagination, ordering, empty-result behavior, or what an 'environment' contains in Coolify. For a listing tool with a bare one-line description, the behavioral picture is thin.

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?

A single short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no wasted clauses. Only the '[UNIFIED]' tag is superfluous.

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?

With two required identifiers at 0% schema coverage and no output schema, the definition should at minimum explain 'site' and 'project_uuid' and sketch the returned environment shape. It does neither, so an agent cannot reliably construct the call from the definition alone.

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%, so the description carries the full burden and fails to explain either parameter. It never clarifies what 'site' means (Coolify instance/host?) or the form of 'project_uuid' (where to obtain it, UUID vs slug), leaving an agent to guess both required values.

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 gives a clear verb and resource ('List all environments') scoped to 'a Coolify project', which distinguishes it from the create/delete siblings. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix adds no meaning but doesn't obscure the purpose.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It implies the usage context (you need a project), but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and doesn't point to alternatives such as listing applications or services when environments aren't what the agent needs.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools