Dokploy MCP Server

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

Annotations indicate this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent, open-world operation, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond what's in annotations. It doesn't explain what 'start' entails (e.g., whether it requires specific permissions, what happens if the MongoDB is already running, or any side effects). With annotations covering basic hints, the description adds minimal value.

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 and front-loaded with the tool name and method, but it's under-specified rather than concise. The parameter listing is redundant with the schema and doesn't add useful information, making the structure inefficient.

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 (a state-changing operation with no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on prerequisites, expected outcomes, error conditions, and how it differs from sibling tools. Annotations provide some hints, but the description fails to add necessary context for effective use.

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%, so the description must compensate, but it only lists 'mongoId' as a required string without explaining its meaning (e.g., what a MongoDB ID is, where to find it, or format examples). This adds little semantic value beyond the schema's type and requirement.

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 restates the tool name and title ('mongo.start') without providing a clear, specific purpose. It mentions 'POST' and lists parameters, but doesn't explain what 'start' means in this context (e.g., starting a MongoDB service/instance). This is a tautology that adds little beyond the name/title.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools include 'dokploy_mongo_stop', 'dokploy_mongo_changeStatus', and other database start tools (e.g., 'dokploy_mariadb_start'), but the description doesn't mention any of these or provide context for selection.

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