Dokploy MCP Server

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations already declare, such as rate limits or authentication needs. No contradiction with 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 front-loads redundant name/HTTP method info, then lists parameters without explanation. While concise, it wastes space on unhelpful repetition rather than adding value.

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 tool with 3 parameters (0% schema coverage), no output schema, and no sibling differentiation, the description is inadequate. It lacks purpose, parameter semantics, and usage context, leaving the agent poorly informed despite good annotations.

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 schema provides no parameter descriptions. The description lists parameter names and types but adds no semantic meaning (e.g., what 'id' refers to, what 'repoPath' expects). It fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 with '[patch] patch.readRepoDirectories (GET)' and lists parameters, but doesn't explain what the tool actually does. It's a tautology that doesn't clarify the verb (read directories from a repository) or distinguish from siblings like 'dokploy_patch_readRepoFile'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention context, prerequisites, or sibling tools like 'dokploy_patch_readRepoFile' for file reading versus directory listing.

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