Dokploy MCP Server

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true (irreversible deletion) and readOnlyHint=false (mutation), which the description aligns with by implying deletion. The description adds value by specifying the HTTP method (POST), which isn't covered by annotations, providing useful context for invocation. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 includes redundant information (repeating 'volumeBackups' and the tool name) and lacks a clear, front-loaded purpose statement. It could be more structured, such as starting with a direct action description, but it avoids unnecessary verbosity.

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 destructive nature (annotations show destructiveHint=true), no output schema, and low parameter coverage, the description is inadequate. It doesn't address critical aspects like what happens post-deletion (e.g., confirmation, error handling), permissions required, or how to verify the backup exists before deletion, leaving gaps for safe 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 description must compensate. It lists 'volumeBackupId' as a required string parameter but doesn't explain what this ID is, how to obtain it, or its format (e.g., from 'dokploy_volumeBackups_list' or 'dokploy_volumeBackups_one'). This leaves the parameter meaning unclear beyond the schema's basic type constraints.

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 volume backups ('volumeBackups.delete'), which is a clear verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'dokploy_backup_remove' or 'dokploy_volumeBackups_remove' (if they exist in the list, though not explicitly shown), making it somewhat vague about its specific scope within the backup system.

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. The description lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid volumeBackupId), exclusions, or comparisons to other deletion tools in the sibling list, such as 'dokploy_backup_remove' for general backups.

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