Dokploy MCP Server

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

Annotations provide clear hints (destructiveHint: true, readOnlyHint: false, etc.), but the description adds no behavioral context beyond what's inferred from 'killProcess'. It doesn't explain what 'kill' entails (e.g., forceful termination, side effects, or permissions required), though annotations cover the safety profile adequately, so the bar is lower.

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 not front-loaded with key information; it starts with a redundant label '[deployment] deployment.killProcess (POST)' before listing parameters. It avoids fluff but could be more structured to highlight the tool's action and context first.

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 destructive nature (per annotations), no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on what 'killProcess' does operationally, potential outcomes, or error conditions, making it inadequate for safe and effective use by an agent.

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%, and the description only lists 'deploymentId' as a required parameter without adding any meaning, format, or examples. It fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions, leaving the parameter's purpose and constraints unclear.

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 kills a process for a deployment, which is a specific action ('killProcess') on a resource ('deployment'), but it doesn't distinguish it from sibling tools like 'dokploy_application_killBuild' or 'dokploy_compose_killBuild', leaving ambiguity about when to use this specific deployment kill tool versus others.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only lists parameters without context, prerequisites, or comparisons to sibling tools like 'stop' or 'cancelDeployment' operations, leaving the agent to guess based on the tool name alone.

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