dokploy_server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention side effects, permissions, rate limits, return values, or what happens on success/failure. For actions like 'remove' or 'update', the behavior is not described. The description is purely parametric.

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 very concise, using a compact format to list actions and their parameters. It front-loads the purpose with 'Manage servers.' and then efficiently summarizes action-specific requirements. However, it could be better structured with bullet points or clearer separation between actions, but overall it earns its space.

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 complexity of 12 parameters and 8 actions with no output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It covers only basic parameter requirements per action, omitting details about return values, error states, pagination, or behavioral nuances. A more thorough description is needed for such a multi-action tool.

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 schema coverage is only 8%, so the description must add meaning. While it does not explain each parameter's semantics, it groups required parameters per action (e.g., 'create: name+ipAddress+port+username+sshKeyId+serverType'), which adds value by indicating which parameters are relevant for which action. This partially compensates for the low schema coverage, but not entirely.

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 starts with 'Manage servers' which clearly identifies the resource. It then lists specific actions (list, get, create, update, remove, etc.) and their required parameters, providing a clear purpose. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like dokploy_infrastructure, which might also involve server management, but the action list makes it distinct enough.

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 lacks any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, context, or when not to use it. The list of actions with required parameters implies usage, but no explicit context or exclusions are provided.

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