List resources

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions optional pagination, summary, and filters, giving a hint of behavior. However, it does not explicitly state that it is a read-only operation, what summary mode does, or any details about return format or pagination defaults. The description is too thin to fully inform the agent.

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 one concise sentence that is front-loaded with the core action. No unnecessary words or repetition. It efficiently conveys the essential function and option categories.

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?

With 5 optional parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not clarify the resource types included, the effect of summary mode, or filter values. An agent cannot confidently decide when to use this tool or how to set parameters correctly based solely on this description.

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%, so the description must compensate. It groups parameters into 'pagination, summary, and filters', which maps loosely to limit/offset, summary, and type/status. However, it does not explain individual parameter meanings, allowed values, or how filters interact. The description adds minimal meaning over the parameter names.

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 clearly states the tool lists Coolify resources, which is a specific verb-resource pairing. It mentions optional pagination, summary, and filters, providing a basic scope. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like listApplications or listDatabases, leaving ambiguity about what 'resources' encompasses.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions. Sibling tools like listApplications and listDatabases suggest more specific alternatives, but the description does not explain when listResources is preferred.

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