portkey-admin-mcp

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 mentions the tool retrieves time-series data but does not specify whether it's read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, or describes the return format (e.g., granularity, pagination). For a tool with 21 parameters and no annotations, this is a significant gap in behavioral context.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary details. It uses clear language and avoids redundancy, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 (21 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is inadequate. It lacks details on behavioral traits, output format, and usage context, leaving significant gaps for the agent to operate effectively with this analytics 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, meaning all parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying time-series filtering, so it meets the baseline of 3 where the schema does the heavy lifting, but does not compensate with extra context like default behaviors or interdependencies.

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 tool's purpose: 'Retrieve request analytics as time-series data, showing total, successful, and failed requests over time.' It specifies the verb ('retrieve'), resource ('request analytics'), and output format ('time-series data'), but does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling analytics tools like get_cost_analytics or get_error_analytics.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or compare it to other analytics tools in the sibling list, leaving the agent to infer usage based solely on the tool name and description.

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