Coolify Creation MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

create_docker_image_application

Create a Docker image application in Coolify with API-based configuration, returning its UUID and authenticated deploy webhook for later deployment.

Instructions

Create one Docker Image application using Coolify's API. Requires read and write token permissions. Returns UUID and authenticated deploy webhook. Does not deploy. Git automatic deployment is disabled. On uncertain failure inspect inventory before retrying.

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": {
      "project_uuid": "<project_uuid>",
      "server_uuid": "<server_uuid>",
      "environment_uuid": "<environment_uuid>",
      "name": "<name>",
      "docker_registry_image_name": "<docker_registry_image_name>",
      "docker_registry_image_tag": "<docker_registry_image_tag>"
    },
    "name": "create_docker_image_application"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`name`	Yes
`domains`	No
`redirect`	No	both
`server_uuid`	Yes
`project_uuid`	Yes
`ports_exposes`	No	80
`destination_uuid`	No
`environment_uuid`	Yes
`autogenerate_domain`	No
`health_check_enabled`	No
`docker_registry_image_tag`	Yes
`docker_registry_image_name`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 29, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark it as a non-idempotent, non-destructive write with open-world reach; the description adds real context on top: read+write token requirement, that it does not trigger deployment, that git auto-deploy is disabled, and the correct retry posture after an ambiguous failure. It stops short of permission-failure modes or rate limits.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with purpose and permission requirement, with no filler. The telegraphic phrasing ('Does not deploy. Git automatic deployment is disabled.') is efficient though slightly clipped.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema exists, and the description usefully covers the return values (UUID and authenticated deploy webhook) plus the no-deploy side effect. For a 12-parameter creation tool with zero schema description coverage, however, the absence of any parameter guidance leaves a material gap.

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% across 12 parameters (6 required), including non-obvious fields like destination_uuid, ports_exposes, autogenerate_domain and the domains/redirect pairing. The description mentions none of them, so an agent must infer all argument meaning from the bare JSON Schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create one Docker Image application') and scopes it to Coolify's API, which distinguishes it from the git-based create_* siblings. It does not, however, name the plan_docker_image_application sibling that plainly precedes it in the workflow.

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?

Gives one concrete usage rule ('On uncertain failure inspect inventory before retrying') and implicitly that this tool does not deploy. It never says when to use this versus plan_docker_image_application or the other create_* variants, so routing is left to inference.

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

Deploy Server