Dokploy MCP Server

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

The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond what annotations already provide. Annotations clearly indicate this is a read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, open-world operation. The description only adds that it's a GET request, which aligns with readOnlyHint=true. However, it doesn't provide any additional behavioral details such as what 'public' means in this context, whether authentication is required, rate limits, or what specific data is returned. With comprehensive annotations covering the core safety profile, the description adds some value but remains limited.

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 extremely concise - arguably too concise. While it contains no wasted words, it's under-specified rather than appropriately concise. The single bracketed phrase '[whitelabeling] whitelabeling.getPublic (GET)' doesn't provide enough meaningful information. It's front-loaded in the sense that all information is presented immediately, but that information is insufficient for the agent to understand the tool's purpose and usage.

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 that this is a zero-parameter tool with comprehensive annotations but no output schema, the description is incomplete. While annotations cover safety aspects, the description fails to explain what 'getPublic' actually retrieves, what 'public' means in this whitelabeling context, or what the return format looks like. For a tool that presumably returns whitelabeling configuration data, the description should specify what kind of data is returned and in what context 'public' applies.

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 tool has zero parameters with 100% schema description coverage (empty schema). The description doesn't need to explain any parameters since none exist. According to the scoring rules, zero parameters warrants a baseline score of 4, as there's no parameter information to provide beyond what the schema already documents (which is that there are no parameters).

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 '[whitelabeling] whitelabeling.getPublic (GET)' is essentially a tautology that restates the tool name and title with minimal additional context. It mentions 'whitelabeling' and 'getPublic' but doesn't explain what 'public' refers to or what specific whitelabeling data is retrieved. While it includes the HTTP method '(GET)', this doesn't meaningfully clarify the tool's purpose beyond what's already implied by the name.

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 absolutely no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any prerequisites, context for usage, or differentiate it from sibling tools like 'dokploy_whitelabeling_get' or 'dokploy_whitelabeling_update'. The agent receives no information about appropriate use cases or when this specific 'getPublic' variant should be selected over other whitelabeling tools.

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