portkey-admin-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions the tool retrieves analytics as time-series data but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it's read-only, requires permissions, has rate limits, pagination, or what format the data returns. For a tool with 21 parameters and no annotations, this is a significant gap.

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?

Single sentence is appropriately concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. No wasted words, though it could be slightly more structured for clarity.

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?

For a complex analytics tool with 21 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain the return format, data granularity, or behavioral constraints, leaving significant gaps for agent 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 21 parameters thoroughly. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond implying time-series filtering, which is covered by the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('cache hit latency analytics'), specifying it returns time-series data with total and average latency. It distinguishes from general 'get_latency_analytics' by focusing on cache hits, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'get_cache_hit_rate' (a sibling tool).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_cache_hit_rate' or 'get_latency_analytics'. The description implies it's for cache hit latency analytics but doesn't specify use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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