Dokploy MCP Server

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

Annotations indicate this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent, open-world operation. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the HTTP method (POST), which aligns with the annotations but doesn't provide additional details like authentication needs, rate limits, or what the session enables. With annotations covering basic traits, the description adds minimal value.

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 a single, compact string but under-specified—it lacks essential purpose and usage information. While not verbose, it fails to convey necessary context efficiently, making it less helpful than a well-structured, concise description would be.

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 likely complexity (creating a Stripe customer portal session) and lack of output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the session is for, what it returns, or any side effects. Annotations provide basic hints, but the description fails to add meaningful context for an agent to understand the tool's role.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description doesn't mention parameters, which is appropriate. Baseline is 4 for zero parameters, as there's nothing to compensate for.

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 '[stripe] stripe.createCustomerPortalSession (POST)' restates the tool name with minimal context. It indicates the service (Stripe) and HTTP method but lacks a clear verb-resource statement explaining what the tool actually does (e.g., creates a customer portal session for billing management). This is closer to a tautology than a meaningful description.

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, what prerequisites exist, or alternatives. Given the sibling tools include other Stripe-related tools (e.g., createCheckoutSession, getCurrentPlan), there is no differentiation to help an agent choose appropriately.

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