Dokploy MCP Server

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

The description provides no behavioral information beyond what's in the annotations. While annotations indicate this is a non-readOnly, non-destructive, non-idempotent operation with openWorldHint, the description doesn't add any context about what 'create' actually means, what gets created, authentication requirements, error conditions, or side effects. However, it doesn't contradict 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.

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

While technically concise, the description is under-specified rather than efficiently structured. It wastes space on a redundant title line and provides no actual description content - just a parameter list that duplicates information already available in the schema. The structure doesn't help an AI agent understand the tool.

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 creation tool with 15 parameters, no output schema, and complex sibling relationships (multiple gitea_* tools), this description is completely inadequate. It provides no information about what's being created, success/failure conditions, return values, or how this tool relates to the broader system context.

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 15 parameters (13 optional, 2 required), the description merely lists parameter names without any semantic explanation. It provides no information about what each parameter means, their relationships, or how they affect the creation operation. This fails to compensate for the complete lack of schema descriptions.

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 'dokploy_gitea_create' as '[gitea] gitea.create (POST)' without explaining what it actually does. It provides no verb or resource specification beyond the name, making it impossible to understand its purpose from the description alone.

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?

There is absolutely no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description contains only a parameter list with no contextual information about prerequisites, appropriate use cases, or relationships to sibling tools like other gitea_* tools.

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