Dokploy MCP Server

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

Annotations indicate this is a non-readOnly, non-destructive, non-idempotent, open-world operation, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond what's already in annotations. It doesn't explain what 'saving' entails (e.g., creates new provider, updates existing, requires specific permissions), doesn't mention side effects, and provides no information about response format or error conditions. With annotations covering basic safety hints, the description adds minimal value but fails to provide meaningful behavioral transparency.

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 relatively concise with a clear structure: tool name with HTTP method followed by a parameter list. However, it's under-specified rather than efficiently concise - it lacks essential explanatory content that would help an agent understand the tool's purpose and usage. The parameter list formatting is clear but doesn't add value beyond what's already in the schema.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (8 parameters, mutation operation, no output schema), the description is severely incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool does, when to use it, what the parameters mean, what behavior to expect, or what the response contains. With annotations providing only basic safety hints and no output schema, the description fails to provide the contextual information needed for effective tool selection and invocation.

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 description coverage is 0%, meaning none of the 8 parameters have descriptions in the schema. The description lists parameter names and types but provides no semantic meaning for any parameters. It doesn't explain what 'giteaId' represents, what 'watchPaths' are for, or how parameters relate to each other. For a tool with 8 parameters and zero schema coverage, this minimal parameter listing is insufficient to compensate for the documentation gap.

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 is essentially a tautology that restates the tool name with minimal additional context. It states 'application.saveGiteaProvider (POST)' which repeats the name and adds the HTTP method, but doesn't explain what saving a Gitea provider actually does or what resource it affects. While it mentions 'application' context, it lacks a specific verb-resource combination that clarifies the tool's function beyond its name.

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 absolutely no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are multiple sibling tools with similar naming patterns (e.g., saveBitbucketProvider, saveGithubProvider, saveGitlabProvider, saveGitProvider), but the description offers no differentiation or context about when this specific Gitea provider tool should be selected over those other provider tools or other application-related tools.

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