Skip to main content
Glama
aledlie

Doppler MCP Server

by aledlie

doppler_secrets_set

Set secret values in Doppler for secure configuration management. Specify secret name, value, project, and config to update your secrets store.

Instructions

Set a secret value in Doppler

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesThe name of the secret to set
valueYesThe value to set for the secret
projectNoThe Doppler project name (optional if set via doppler setup)
configNoThe Doppler config name (optional if set via doppler setup)

Implementation Reference

  • Specific switch case implementing the logic for the doppler_secrets_set tool by constructing the Doppler CLI command: doppler secrets set name=value [--project proj] [--config config] --json
    case "doppler_secrets_set":
      parts.push("secrets", "set", `${getString("name")}=${getString("value")}`);
      if (getString("project")) parts.push("--project", getString("project")!);
      if (getString("config")) parts.push("--config", getString("config")!);
      parts.push("--json");
      break;
  • Input schema definition for the doppler_secrets_set tool, specifying required name and value, optional project and config.
    {
      name: "doppler_secrets_set",
      description: "Set a secret value in Doppler",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          name: {
            type: "string",
            description: "The name of the secret to set",
          },
          value: {
            type: "string",
            description: "The value to set for the secret",
          },
          project: {
            type: "string",
            description: "The Doppler project name (optional if set via doppler setup)",
          },
          config: {
            type: "string",
            description: "The Doppler config name (optional if set via doppler setup)",
          },
        },
        required: ["name", "value"],
      },
    },
  • src/index.ts:27-31 (registration)
    Tool list registration handler that exposes the doppler_secrets_set tool (via toolDefinitions) to MCP clients.
    server.setRequestHandler(ListToolsRequestSchema, async () => {
      return {
        tools: toolDefinitions,
      };
    });
  • src/index.ts:34-51 (registration)
    Central callTool request handler that registers execution capability for all tools, including doppler_secrets_set, by dispatching to executeCommand(name, args).
    server.setRequestHandler(CallToolRequestSchema, async (request) => {
      const { name, arguments: args } = request.params;
    
      try {
        const result = await executeCommand(name, args || {});
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: "text",
              text: JSON.stringify(result, null, 2),
            },
          ],
        };
      } catch (error) {
        const errorMessage = error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error);
        throw new McpError(ErrorCode.InternalError, `Doppler CLI error: ${errorMessage}`);
      }
    });
  • Helper function executeCommand that runs the constructed Doppler CLI command using execSync, handles output parsing, and error handling.
    export async function executeCommand(
      toolName: string,
      args: DopplerArgs
    ): Promise<any> {
      const command = buildDopplerCommand(toolName, args);
    
      try {
        const output = execSync(command, {
          encoding: "utf-8",
          stdio: ["pipe", "pipe", "pipe"],
          maxBuffer: 10 * 1024 * 1024, // 10MB buffer
        });
    
        // Try to parse as JSON, if it fails return raw output
        try {
          return JSON.parse(output);
        } catch {
          return { output: output.trim() };
        }
      } catch (error: any) {
        // Handle execution errors
        const stderr = error.stderr?.toString() || "";
        const stdout = error.stdout?.toString() || "";
        const message = stderr || stdout || error.message;
        throw new Error(`Doppler CLI command failed: ${message}`);
      }
    }

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description does not state side effects (overwrites existing secrets?), auth requirements, environment interplay (which config does it target?), or reversibility. For a mutation tool with zero annotations, this is a significant gap.

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?

Single concise sentence with no waste. However, at only 7 words, it borders on under-specification rather than conciseness, though for a simple tool it's acceptable.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is thin. It does not explain overwrite behavior, config targeting defaults, post-set verification options, or prerequisites. The 4-parameter schema is fully covered but the tool's operational context is largely unexplained.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 4 parameters. The description adds nothing beyond the schema—it doesn't clarify optionality nuances (e.g., what happens if config/project are omitted), value format, or interaction between parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Set a secret value in Doppler' uses a specific verb (Set) + resource (secret value in Doppler). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like doppler_secrets_get/list/delete, though it doesn't explicitly contrast them.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites like doppler setup, whether config/project are required, or any caveats about which config the secret applies to. Some context is implied (it's the write counterpart to get/list), but no explicit guidance is given.

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