dokploy-mcp-server

dokploy_registry

Manage container registries to pull private images: create, update, list, get, or remove registries, and test credentials or connections without persisting.

Instructions

Manage container registries for pulling private images. list. get: registryId. create: registryName+username+password+registryUrl (registryType defaults to 'cloud'). update: registryId+fields. remove: registryId. test: registryName+username+password+registryUrl (without persisting). testById: registryId, serverId?.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "action": "<action>"
    },
    "name": "dokploy_registry"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`action`	Yes
`password`	No
`serverId`	No
`username`	No
`registryId`	No
`imagePrefix`	No	Optional image prefix prepended to pull paths
`registryUrl`	No	Registry URL, e.g. ghcr.io or registry.hub.docker.com
`registryName`	No
`registryType`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv1.7.4Jun 29, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
- removedInput schema / properties / imagePrefix / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / imagePrefix / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```
First observedv1.7.0May 29, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The description notes that the 'test' action does not persist, which is a behavioral trait. However, it does not disclose other behavioral details such as destructive nature of 'remove', authentication requirements, or rate limits. With no annotations, the description carries moderate transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is very concise, using a compact notation to convey action-parameter mappings. It front-loads the purpose and then lists actions efficiently. Every sentence contributes, though the terse style may reduce readability.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool complexity (9 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers action-specific parameter requirements but lacks overall context such as return values, error handling, or authentication. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is low (22%), but the description adds value by mapping parameters to specific actions (e.g., 'create: registryName+username+password+registryUrl'). However, it does not explain the semantic meaning of individual parameters beyond the schema, leaving interpretation to the agent.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool manages container registries for pulling private images, and enumerates actions. It is specific about the resource and verb, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools beyond the name.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description only lists actions with parameter hints, but does not provide criteria for selecting this tool over sibling tools like dokploy_docker or dokploy_settings.

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