Coolify Creation MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

create_public_repository_application

Creates a public Git repository application in Coolify, returning its UUID and authenticated deploy webhook without deploying.

Instructions

Create one public Git repository 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>",
      "git_repository": "<git_repository>",
      "git_branch": "<git_branch>",
      "build_pack": "<build_pack>"
    },
    "name": "create_public_repository_application"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`name`	Yes
`is_spa`	No
`domains`	No
`redirect`	No	both
`is_static`	No
`build_pack`	Yes
`git_branch`	Yes
`server_uuid`	Yes
`project_uuid`	Yes
`build_command`	No
`ports_exposes`	No	80
`start_command`	No
`base_directory`	No	/
`git_repository`	Yes
`install_command`	No
`destination_uuid`	No
`environment_uuid`	Yes
`publish_directory`	No
`autogenerate_domain`	No
`dockerfile_location`	No
`health_check_enabled`	No
`docker_compose_domains`	No
`docker_compose_location`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 29, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: discloses the read/write token permission requirement, that the call returns a UUID and an authenticated deploy webhook, that no deployment is triggered, and that Git auto-deployment is disabled. The retry caveat also reinforces the non-idempotent hint with concrete recovery behavior.

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?

Six short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by permissions, return value, and failure handling. 'Does not deploy' and 'Git automatic deployment is disabled' are near-duplicates, a minor redundancy in an otherwise tight description.

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?

Covers the safety and return-value story well (no output schema exists, and the UUID/webhook return is stated), which matters for a mutation tool. However, for a 23-parameter creation call with zero schema descriptions, the complete absence of parameter guidance leaves a real 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?

23 parameters with 0% schema description coverage, and the description explains none of them — no guidance on build_pack choice, domains vs docker_compose_domains, base_directory, or which of the 7 required UUIDs come from where. The 'public Git repository' phrasing only weakly implies git_repository/git_branch.

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 public Git repository application' — with a scope qualifier ('public Git repository') that distinguishes it from the deploy_key, github_app, dockerfile, and docker_image siblings. It does not explicitly name those alternatives, but the resource noun is precise enough to route correctly.

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 useful recovery guidance ('On uncertain failure inspect inventory before retrying') but never states when to pick this over plan_public_repository_application or create_deploy_key_application. Usage is implied by the resource name rather than stated.

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

Deploy Server