Dokploy MCP Server

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

Annotations provide clear hints (readOnly, non-destructive, idempotent, openWorld), but the description adds minimal value by specifying it's a GET operation, which aligns with readOnlyHint. However, it does not disclose additional behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, or what the output indicates (e.g., boolean status). With annotations covering safety, a baseline score is appropriate, though more context could enhance transparency.

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 under-specified, not truly concise. It includes the tool path and '(GET)' which is somewhat front-loaded, but the parameter listing is minimal and lacks useful information. While not verbose, it does not efficiently convey necessary details, making it mediocre in structure.

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 complexity of checking a Traefik dashboard port status, the description is incomplete. No output schema exists, and the description does not explain return values (e.g., boolean indicating enabled/disabled). With annotations providing safety hints but no behavioral context, the description fails to offer a comprehensive understanding for effective tool use.

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 only defines 'serverId' as an optional string without descriptions. The tool description lists 'serverId' but provides no semantic meaning, such as what a serverId represents or how it affects the query. This fails to compensate for the low coverage, leaving parameter purpose 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.haveTraefikDashboardPortEnabled') with '(GET)' appended, which is a tautology. It does not explain what the tool does beyond indicating it's a GET operation. No specific verb or resource clarification is provided, making it vague and unhelpful for distinguishing its purpose.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks any context about its application, prerequisites, or exclusions. Given the many sibling tools, this omission leaves the agent without direction on appropriate usage scenarios.

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