Dokploy MCP Server

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

Annotations indicate this is a read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, and open-world operation, which the description doesn't contradict. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations provide—it doesn't explain what a 'preview deployment' entails, whether it returns a list or summary, or any constraints like pagination or rate limits.

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 structured with a clear parameter list, avoiding unnecessary verbosity. However, it's under-specified—the first part ('[previewDeployment] previewDeployment.all (GET)') is redundant with the name and title, reducing efficiency.

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 lack of output schema and low schema description coverage (0%), the description is incomplete. It fails to explain what the tool returns (e.g., a list of preview deployments), their structure, or any error conditions. For a tool with one required parameter and no schema documentation, this leaves the agent with insufficient information to use it effectively.

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?

The description lists the parameter 'applicationId' as required, matching the input schema. With 0% schema description coverage, the schema provides no details about this parameter. The description adds minimal semantics by stating it's required but doesn't explain its purpose, format, or how it relates to preview deployments, leaving significant gaps.

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 ('previewDeployment.all') without explaining what a 'preview deployment' is or what 'all' refers to. It mentions 'GET' which indicates an HTTP method but doesn't specify the action (e.g., list, retrieve). This is a tautology that provides minimal clarification beyond the name itself.

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. While sibling tools include 'dokploy_previewDeployment_delete', 'dokploy_previewDeployment_one', and 'dokploy_previewDeployment_redeploy', the description doesn't differentiate this 'all' variant from those or suggest any context for its use.

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