Dokploy MCP Server

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

Annotations indicate this is not read-only, not destructive, not idempotent, and open-world. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond annotations—it implies a state change (stopping) but doesn't detail effects like service interruption, reversibility, or permissions required. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 includes redundant formatting (brackets, HTTP method) and a parameter list that adds little value. It is front-loaded with the core action but could be more streamlined by omitting the parameter enumeration.

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 (state-changing operation), lack of output schema, and minimal annotations, the description is insufficient. It doesn't cover expected outcomes, error conditions, or side effects, leaving significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool fully.

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 the parameter 'mysqlId' without explaining its meaning, format, or where to obtain it. This fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation, leaving the parameter's semantics unclear.

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 clearly states the verb ('stop') and resource ('mysql'), making the purpose evident. It distinguishes from siblings like 'dokploy_mysql_start' by specifying the opposite action, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with other mysql tools like 'dokploy_mysql_remove' or 'dokploy_mysql_reload'.

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 lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., the MySQL instance must be running), exclusions, or comparisons to similar tools like 'dokploy_mysql_changeStatus' or 'dokploy_application_stop'.

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