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 lacks details on permissions, rate limits, pagination, data freshness, or response format. For a read-only analytics tool with 21 parameters, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 words. It directly communicates what the tool does and the data format, with zero waste or redundancy.

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 tool's complexity (21 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is inadequate. It lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., access controls, data limits), output structure, and usage context, making it incomplete for effective agent invocation despite the concise purpose statement.

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 fully documents all 21 parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond implying time-series filtering via 'over time,' which is already covered by the required time parameters in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the 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 tool's purpose: 'Retrieve token usage analytics as time-series data, showing total, prompt, and completion tokens over time.' It specifies the verb ('retrieve'), resource ('token usage analytics'), and output format ('time-series data'), but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_cost_analytics' or 'get_request_analytics' beyond the token focus.

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 sibling analytics tools (e.g., 'get_cost_analytics', 'get_latency_analytics') or specify use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without contextual usage direction.

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