Dokploy MCP Server

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

Annotations provide useful hints (non-readOnly, non-destructive, non-idempotent, openWorld), but the description adds minimal behavioral context. It doesn't explain what 'deploy' entails operationally, whether it triggers builds, restarts services, or has side effects. The description doesn't contradict annotations, but adds little beyond them.

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?

The description is brief but inefficiently structured. The first line repeats the tool name, and the parameter list is minimal without explanatory value. While not verbose, it fails to use its limited space effectively to convey necessary information.

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?

For a deployment tool with no output schema and minimal annotations, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what happens during deployment, what the expected outcome is, potential errors, or how it differs from related tools. The combination of sparse description and missing output schema leaves significant gaps.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and 3 parameters, the description only lists parameter names without explaining their meaning. It doesn't clarify what 'applicationId' refers to, what 'title' and 'description' modify during deployment, or provide any semantic context beyond the bare parameter list.

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 states the tool name '[application] application.deploy (POST)' which is essentially a tautology of the tool name. It doesn't explain what 'deploy' means in this context or what resource is being deployed. While it mentions 'application', it doesn't clarify what type of application or deployment action occurs.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools like 'dokploy_application_redeploy', 'dokploy_application_start', and 'dokploy_ai_deploy', there's no indication of when deployment is appropriate versus other lifecycle operations or which specific deployment tool to choose.

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