Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Dokploy MCP Server

Dokploy MCP Server

by bravos2k5
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

deployment-removeDeployment

Destructive

Remove a deployment by its ID to clean up resources and manage deployment lifecycle.

Instructions

POST /deployment.removeDeployment

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": {
      "deploymentId": "<deploymentId>"
    },
    "name": "deployment-removeDeployment"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
deploymentIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.29.1

TDQS

D1.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The annotation destructiveHint: true indicates destructiveness, but the description adds no behavioral context. It does not explain side effects, reversibility, or impact on associated resources. openWorldHint: true suggests unknown behavior, yet no details are provided.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is extremely concise but at the expense of utility. A single HTTP path does not constitute a helpful tool description; it lacks meaningful content and structure.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive operation with no output schema and minimal parameter guidance, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to provide essential context for safe and correct usage, especially given the many sibling tools.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The parameter deploymentId has no description in the schema or tool description. With 0% schema coverage, the tool fails to explain what deploymentId refers to or how to obtain it, leaving the agent with no semantic guidance.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description merely restates the HTTP method and endpoint path, providing no clarification beyond the name. 'Remove deployment' is vague and does not specify what removal entails (e.g., delete, stop, cancel). It does not distinguish from siblings like deployment-killProcess.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like deployment-killProcess or application-cancelDeployment. The description lacks context for appropriate usage conditions or prerequisites.

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