system

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, indicating safe read-only and open-world behavior. The description adds no further behavioral context, such as pagination, truncation, or output formats, but it does not contradict the annotations.

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?

The description is very short and front-loaded with the main actions, but it omits the 'infrastructure_overview' action and lacks details on response or usage. It is concise but incomplete.

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?

Given the complex schema with multiple action variants and many parameters, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the differences between actions or the extensive parameters for 'infrastructure_overview', and there is no output schema to compensate.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage, so the description adds no extra meaning for parameters. Each parameter's purpose is already fully described in the schema, making the description's contribution minimal.

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 states 'System actions for Coolify (health, version, verify)', clearly indicating the tool is for system-level operations. It lists specific actions, making the purpose understandable, though it omits the 'infrastructure_overview' action present in the schema.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings (database, project, resource, etc.). It does not mention prerequisites, context, or alternatives, leaving the agent without decision support.

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