Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
coolify-mcp

coolify-mcp

by frndchagas
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Teams

teams
Read-only

Inspect Coolify team info: list all entries, view current team and its members, or fetch a specific entry by ID.

Instructions

Read Coolify teams. Actions: list, current, current_members, get (needs id), members (needs id).

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": {
      "action": "<action>"
    },
    "name": "teams"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoTeam id for get/members
actionYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.1.5

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and open-world, and the description confirms the read behavior. It adds the precondition that 'get' and 'members' require id, but doesn't disclose other behavioral aspects like pagination, error handling, or return formats.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence followed by a compact action list, with no wasted words.

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?

The tool has a simple action-dispatch structure, but the description doesn't specify the return values for each action or the meaning of 'current'. Given the read-only annotation and clear action names, it's adequate but not fully complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description clarifies which actions require the 'id' parameter, complementing the schema where id is optional but conditionally needed. It repeats the enum values but adds dependency information, partially compensating for the 50% schema description coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Read Coolify teams' and enumerates the specific actions, making the tool's purpose unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools for other resources.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The phrase 'Read Coolify teams' establishes the domain, and the action list with 'needs id' annotations provides conditional usage guidance. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternative tools or explain selection between actions.

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