Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
coolify-mcp

coolify-mcp

by frndchagas
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

List applications

listApplications
Read-only

Retrieve a paginated list of all Coolify applications, using limit, offset, and summary to control output.

Instructions

List all Coolify applications.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "listApplications"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
offsetNo
summaryNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.4

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safe read-only nature is established. The description adds only 'all' as a scope qualifier, but does not disclose pagination behavior, return format, or the meaning of the summary parameter, which are relevant for a list operation.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that states the tool's core purpose without wasted words. It is concise, though it could be expanded with parameter hints without losing efficiency.

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?

For a tool with optional parameters, no output schema, and many similar siblings, this description is incomplete. It fails to mention pagination, return structure, or how it differs from tools like listResources, leaving the agent without enough context to invoke it confidently.

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%, and the description does not mention the limit, offset, or summary parameters. While the parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, 'summary' is ambiguous, and the lack of any explanation for how these parameters affect the result is a significant gap.

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 clearly identifies the action ('List') and the resource ('Coolify applications'), and the word 'all' adds scope. However, it doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like listResources or listAppDeployments, which may also return application-related data.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling list tools (listResources, listProjects, listServers, etc.), the absence of context or exclusions leaves the agent to guess which tool is appropriate for a given task.

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