Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
porkbun-mcp-server

porkbun-mcp-server

by Avicennasis
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

retrieve_api_key

Poll for approval of an API key authorization request and retrieve the public API key when approved.

Instructions

Poll to check whether an API key authorization request has been approved. Returns PENDING while awaiting approval, or the public API key on approval.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "request_token": "<request_token>"
    },
    "name": "retrieve_api_key"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
request_tokenYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided. The description only states that it returns PENDING or the key, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as idempotency, rate limits, or whether it can be called repeatedly. This is minimal for a non-annotated tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, clear sentence that front-loads the purpose and states expected results. No redundant information.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description covers the basic return states but lacks details on error handling, token validity, or what happens if the request was never made. Given the simplicity of the tool, it is minimally adequate but not fully comprehensive.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%. The description does not explain the 'request_token' parameter, its format, or its purpose. The added value over the schema is zero.

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 uses specific verbs ('Poll to check') and identifies the resource ('API key authorization request'). It clearly states the return values (PENDING or public key) and distinguishes itself from siblings like 'request_api_key' which initiates the request.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies it is used after an authorization request, likely made by 'request_api_key'. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use, when not to use, or polling frequency. No alternatives are mentioned.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools