coolify_run_volume_backup

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

Annotations already indicate this is not read-only and not idempotent, so the agent knows it's a mutating action. The description adds valuable context about being subject to operation mode, allowlist, and production guard policies, which is not captured in the annotations and helps the agent anticipate potential failures.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff. The first sentence states the action, the second adds important policy context. Every word earns its place.

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?

The description covers the core action and constraints but omits what the tool returns, whether execution is asynchronous, and how storage_uuid and resource_uuid correlate. With no output schema, these are meaningful gaps for an agent invoking the tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100% and each parameter has a basic description, but the tool description does not add meaningful explanation beyond what the schema provides. The relation between resource_uuid and storage_uuid is implied by 'storage mount on an application' but not explicitly spelled out. Baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema covers the surface but not deeper semantics.

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 the specific verb 'Run' with the resource 'volume backup for a storage mount' and clearly scopes it to applications, databases, or services. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_backup_config which sets up a configuration, or list_backup_executions which lists results.

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 states what the tool does but does not explicitly say when to use it versus alternatives. The mention of operation mode, allowlist, and production guard policies implies constraints but does not provide clear guidance on when to choose this tool over create_backup_config or list_backup_executions.

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