Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Dokploy MCP Server

Dokploy MCP Server

by bravos2k5
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

docker-getConfig

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve Docker container configuration by providing container ID and optional server ID.

Instructions

GET /docker.getConfig

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": {
      "containerId": "<containerId>"
    },
    "name": "docker-getConfig"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
containerIdYes
serverIdNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.29.1

TDQS

D1.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint: true, idempotentHint: true) already indicate a safe read operation, but the description adds no behavioral context such as what kind of configuration is returned, whether it requires authentication, or any side effects. The description does not enhance the agent's understanding beyond the annotations.

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 (one line) but at the cost of being uninformative. It is not appropriately sized for the tool's complexity; it sacrifices all useful detail for brevity, making it a tautology rather than a valuable explanation.

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?

Given the tool has two parameters and no output schema, the description should explain what configuration is being fetched (e.g., Docker container config, server config) and the relationship between parameters. It provides none of this, resulting in a completely inadequate specification for an AI agent to use the tool correctly.

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 input schema has two parameters (containerId, serverId) with zero description coverage, and the tool description provides no information about their meaning, purpose, or expected values. This leaves the agent unable to correctly populate the parameters.

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

Purpose1/5

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

The description 'GET /docker.getConfig' is a tautology that merely restates the tool name and HTTP method. It fails to specify what configuration is being retrieved (e.g., container config, server config) or any other purpose, leaving the agent without a clear understanding of the tool's function.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like docker-getContainers or docker-removeContainer. The description lacks any context about prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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