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, open-world operation, but the description adds minimal context by specifying it's a POST request, implying a state-changing action. However, it doesn't elaborate on what 'deploy' entails (e.g., provisioning, configuration, starting), potential side effects, or error conditions, leaving behavioral gaps despite 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 brief but inefficiently structured; it includes redundant information like '(POST)' which is implied by annotations, and the parameter list is minimal but not front-loaded with critical usage details. It avoids verbosity but lacks effective organization.

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 complexity of a deployment tool with no output schema and 0% schema description coverage, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'deploy' does, expected outcomes, or error handling, making it incomplete for effective agent use despite annotations providing some safety 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description only lists 'mysqlId' as a required parameter without explaining its meaning (e.g., an identifier for an existing MySQL configuration). This adds little value beyond the schema, failing to compensate for the 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 states '[mysql] mysql.deploy (POST)' which partially indicates the resource (MySQL) and action (deploy), but lacks specificity about what 'deploy' means in this context. It doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like dokploy_mysql_create, dokploy_mysql_start, or dokploy_mysql_rebuild, leaving the exact purpose ambiguous.

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 doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., whether a MySQL instance must exist first), nor does it reference sibling tools like dokploy_mysql_create or dokploy_mysql_start for comparison, leaving usage unclear.

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