Skip to main content
Glama

API keys of a site (write-only)

manage_secrets
Destructive

Use when the site's code needs an API key (weather, CRM, maps…): list shows the names only, delete removes one, set stores one encrypted. The owner saves a key's value in Ginta's own key box (the website's Settings → More → Keys and connections), so it never goes through the chat; set without value returns that link. Values can never be read back, by you or anyone; use them through manage_connections.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoSecret name in capitals, e.g. "WEATHER_API_KEY" (set, delete).
valueNoLeave out: the owner saves the value in Ginta's key box (the link this returns). Only for a key the user already chose to send here themselves; never ask for one in the chat and never invent one.
actionYesWhat to do: list the names, set (save or replace) one, or delete one.
site_idYesThe site id: the first part of the site URL, e.g. "bella-roma" for https://bella-roma.ginta.page (see list_sites).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoset/delete: the secret's name.
textYesThe answer in words, the same as the text content: read it (for get_guide the whole guide, for get_site the files' contents).
deletedNo
secretsNolist: names only, never values.
site_idYesThe site id.
replacedNo
key_box_urlNoset without value: where the owner saves the key in Ginta.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / text
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The answer in words, the same as the text content: read it (for get_guide the whole guide, for get_site the files' contents).",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • changedOutput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "site_id"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "site_id",
      +  "text"
      +]
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / value / description
      Previous value: -"The key itself (set only). Ask the user to paste it; never invent one."New value: +"Leave out: the owner saves the value in Ginta's key box (the link this returns). Only for a key the user already chose to send here themselves; never ask for one in the chat and never invent one."
    • addedOutput schema / properties / key_box_url
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "set without value: where the owner saves the key in Ginta.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the destructiveHint/readOnlyHint annotations, the description discloses the key behavioral fact an agent cannot infer: values are write-only and can never be read back by anyone, and set without a value returns an out-of-band owner link instead. It is slightly less explicit about what delete destroys (whether the name or the stored value) than it could be, given destructiveHint=true.

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?

It front-loads the trigger ('Use when…') and then enumerates the three actions compactly, with no filler sentences. The middle sentence about the owner's key box is dense and slightly nested, but every clause carries actionable information.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a destructive, multi-action, write-only tool with four parameters and an output schema, the description covers the trigger, per-action behavior, the out-of-band value path, and the follow-up tool. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it without leaking secrets is missing.

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 100%, and the schema already documents name format, the site_id derivation, the action enum, and the instruction to omit value. The description largely restates the omit-value path ('set without value returns that link'), adding little meaning the schema does not already carry, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description names the resource (a site's API keys) and spells out each of the three actions — 'list shows the names only, delete removes one, set stores one encrypted' — so an agent knows exactly what the tool does per action value. It also separates itself from the sibling manage_connections by saying keys must be 'use[d] through manage_connections'.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The opening clause gives an explicit trigger — 'Use when the site's code needs an API key (weather, CRM, maps…)' — and the closing sentence routes consumption to the alternative tool, manage_connections. It also states hard exclusions ('never ask for one in the chat and never invent one') that prevent a common misuse.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources