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 doesn't contradict. However, the description adds minimal behavioral context beyond annotations—it doesn't specify what gets cleaned, potential side effects, or prerequisites. With annotations covering safety, a baseline 3 is appropriate, but the description could enhance understanding.

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 poorly structured—it mixes endpoint notation ('[settings] settings.cleanAll (POST)') with a parameter list without clear separation. While concise, it lacks effective front-loading of key information, making it less helpful for quick understanding.

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 inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'cleanAll' does, what is affected, or the expected outcome, leaving significant gaps for a potentially high-impact operation.

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 description must compensate. It only lists 'serverId (string, optional)' without explaining its purpose, format, or impact. This fails to add meaningful semantics beyond the bare schema, leaving the parameter's role 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 restates the tool name and title ('settings.cleanAll') without explaining what 'cleanAll' means. It mentions 'POST' and lists a parameter, but doesn't specify what resource is being cleaned or what 'clean' entails. This is a tautology that adds little beyond the name/title.

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. With many sibling tools (e.g., dokploy_settings_cleanAllDeploymentQueue, dokploy_settings_cleanDockerPrune), the description fails to differentiate this tool's specific use case or context, leaving the agent without usage direction.

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