Dokploy MCP Server

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

The description doesn't explicitly disclose behavioral traits, but it doesn't contradict the annotations either. The annotations indicate this is a destructive (destructiveHint: true), non-read-only (readOnlyHint: false), non-idempotent (idempotentHint: false), and open-world (openWorldHint: true) operation. While the description adds no extra context (e.g., what exactly gets destroyed, authentication needs, or rate limits), the annotations provide clear behavioral information, so the bar is lower. The description's mention of 'POST' aligns with a non-read-only action, but it doesn't add significant value 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.

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

The description is concise with two lines, but it's poorly structured and under-specified. The first line '[mongo] mongo.remove (POST)' is redundant with the name, and the second line merely lists the parameter without explanation. While it avoids unnecessary verbosity, it lacks the front-loaded clarity needed for quick understanding, making it more of a minimal placeholder than an effective description.

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 as a destructive operation (per annotations) with 1 parameter, 0% schema description coverage, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what resource is being removed, the implications of the removal, potential side effects, or what the tool returns. For a mutation tool with significant behavioral hints from annotations, the description should provide more context to guide safe and correct usage, but it falls short.

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?

The description lists 'mongoId (string, required)' as a parameter, but this adds minimal meaning beyond the input schema, which already specifies 'mongoId' as a required string with minLength: 1. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate by explaining what 'mongoId' represents (e.g., an identifier for a MongoDB instance, database, or document), but it fails to do so. This leaves the parameter semantics unclear and inadequate for proper usage.

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 '[mongo] mongo.remove (POST)' which is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name 'dokploy_mongo_remove'. It mentions 'mongo' and 'remove' but doesn't specify what resource is being removed (e.g., a MongoDB database, collection, document, or instance). While it implies a deletion operation, it lacks the specificity needed to distinguish it from sibling tools like 'dokploy_mongo_delete' (which doesn't exist but could be similar) or other removal tools in the system.

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. It doesn't mention any prerequisites, context, or comparisons to sibling tools such as 'dokploy_mongo_delete' (if applicable) or other MongoDB-related tools like 'dokploy_mongo_create' or 'dokploy_mongo_update'. Without this information, an AI agent cannot make informed decisions about tool selection.

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