dokploy_preview_deployment

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only lists action-parameter mappings without mentioning side effects (e.g., remove is destructive, redeploy triggers a build), permission requirements, or return value behavior. This is a significant gap for mutating actions like remove and redeploy.

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 sentence that efficiently enumerates actions and their parameter usage using a structured list. It is front-loaded with the resource type and contains no filler, making it highly concise and scannable.

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?

The description covers the core action-to-parameter mapping but lacks details on return values, error behavior, and side effects. For a multi-action tool with no output schema and no annotations, this is a moderate gap that prevents full autonomous understanding.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds crucial meaning by mapping each action to its required parameter (applicationId for list, previewDeploymentId for get/remove/redeploy, and title/description for redeploy). It stops short of stating whether parameters are required or optional per action, but the mapping is valuable.

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 identifies the resource as 'preview deployments' and enumerates four specific actions (list, get, remove, redeploy), clearly stating what the tool does. It also distinguishes this from sibling tools like dokploy_deployment by specifying 'per-PR / per-branch deploys off a parent application'.

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 phrase 'per-PR / per-branch deploys off a parent application' gives context for when this tool should be used, implying its niche. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternatives like dokploy_deployment or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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