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. It mentions retrieving 'all workspaces' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as pagination behavior (implied by parameters but not described), rate limits, authentication needs, or whether it's read-only. The description is minimal and lacks critical operational 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 ('Retrieve all workspaces') and includes additional details ('in your Portkey organization, including their configurations and metadata') without unnecessary words. Every part earns its place.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool with pagination parameters. It lacks details on return values (e.g., format of workspaces data), error handling, or operational constraints like rate limits. For a list tool with parameters, more context is needed to guide effective use.

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%, with clear documentation for 'page_size' and 'current_page'. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what the schema provides, such as default values or pagination details. Baseline score of 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 action ('Retrieve all workspaces') and resource ('in your Portkey organization'), specifying the scope as 'all workspaces' and the content includes 'configurations and metadata'. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_workspace' (singular) or 'list_workspace_members', though the plural 'all workspaces' implies a list operation.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_workspace' (for a single workspace) or 'list_workspace_members' (for members within a workspace). The description implies usage for retrieving all workspaces but lacks explicit context or exclusions.

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