Dokploy MCP Server

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, which the description aligns with by implying a deletion action. However, the description adds minimal behavioral context beyond what annotations provide—it doesn't explain consequences (e.g., irreversible removal, impact on related resources) or any additional traits like error handling. With annotations covering safety, this earns a baseline score for adding some value through the action description.

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 front-loaded with the tool name and action, but it includes redundant formatting (brackets and parentheses) that doesn't add clarity. While not verbose, it could be more structured—e.g., separating the purpose from parameter listing. It's concise but could be improved for readability.

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 destructive nature (per annotations), no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on what a preview deployment is, the deletion's effects, success/error responses, or any dependencies. For a mutation tool with minimal structured data, this leaves significant gaps for an agent to operate safely and 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the schema provides no parameter details. The description lists 'previewDeploymentId (string, required)' but adds no semantic meaning—it doesn't explain what this ID is, where to find it, or its format. For a single required parameter with no schema documentation, the description fails to compensate adequately, leaving the agent with insufficient information.

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 the tool deletes a preview deployment, which is a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't distinguish this from other deletion tools in the sibling list (like dokploy_application_delete, dokploy_compose_delete, etc.), nor does it clarify what a 'preview deployment' is in this context. The purpose is clear but lacks differentiation from similar tools.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing preview deployment), when not to use it, or what happens after deletion. With many sibling deletion tools available, this lack of context makes it difficult for an agent to choose appropriately.

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