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 operation with openWorldHint=true. The description adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations already provide. It doesn't explain what 'creates' actually means in practice (e.g., whether this provisions a new database instance, deploys a container, or creates configuration), what permissions are required, whether there are rate limits, or what happens on failure. For a creation tool with significant implications, this lack of behavioral disclosure is problematic.

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 technically concise but structurally poor. It wastes the first line on redundant technical details ('[mysql] mysql.create (POST)') that don't add functional understanding. The parameter listing is organized but presented without meaningful grouping or prioritization. While not verbose, the structure doesn't effectively communicate the tool's purpose or usage.

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 complex creation tool with 10 parameters, no output schema, and annotations that only cover basic hints, the description is severely incomplete. It doesn't explain what gets created, what the expected outcome is, potential side effects, error conditions, or relationships between parameters. The combination of high parameter count, zero schema descriptions, and minimal descriptive content makes this inadequate for safe and effective tool 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?

With 0% schema description coverage and 10 parameters (5 required), the description carries full burden for explaining parameter meanings. While it lists parameter names and basic types, it provides no semantic context about what each parameter represents (e.g., 'environmentId' - what environment? 'databaseName' - naming constraints? 'dockerImage' - what images are valid?). The description fails to compensate for the complete lack of schema descriptions, leaving most parameters ambiguous.

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 ('mysql.create') without explaining what it actually does. It lists parameters but doesn't state the action being performed (e.g., 'Creates a MySQL database instance' or 'Deploys a MySQL container'). While it mentions 'POST', this is technical implementation detail, not functional purpose. The description fails to distinguish this from sibling MySQL tools like 'dokploy_mysql_deploy' or 'dokploy_mysql_update'.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites, dependencies, or when this creation tool should be used instead of other MySQL-related tools (like 'dokploy_mysql_deploy', 'dokploy_mysql_update', or database tools for other systems). There's no indication of appropriate contexts or constraints for tool invocation.

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