Create Dockerfile application

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Create a new application' and required inputs, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether it triggers a deployment), permission requirements, or reversibility. This is a significant gap for a mutation operation.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, and contains zero redundant phrases. It is concise and well-structured.

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 high complexity (53 parameters), no annotations, and no output schema, this description is far from complete. It only covers the few required fields and leaves the agent without guidance on the many optional settings (ports, health checks, resource limits, etc.) or the expected behavior beyond creation.

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%, and there are 53 parameters. The description adds some valuable semantics by clarifying that the dockerfile param is content, and that environment_name or environment_uuid can be used alternately (which is not clear from the schema where both are listed as required). However, it does not compensate for the vast majority of undocumented parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Create'), clearly identifies the resource ('application'), and specifies the method ('from a Dockerfile'), which differentiates it from sibling tools like createDockerComposeApplication and createDockerImageApplication.

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 gives clear context: use this to create an app from a Dockerfile. It also lists the required parameters (project_uuid, server_uuid, environment_name or environment_uuid, and dockerfile), providing implicit invocation prerequisites. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative tools or exclusions.

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