Skip to main content
Glama
CodesWhat

portkey-admin-mcp

by CodesWhat
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

delete_usage_limit

Destructive

Archive a cumulative usage-limit policy by ID to stop budget enforcement while keeping its historical record accessible through archived-status reads.

Instructions

Archive a cumulative usage-limit policy by id. The policy stops enforcing its budget but its historical record remains available through archived-status reads.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesUsage-limit policy UUID to archive

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYesWhether the tool call succeeded and returned structured data
dataNoStructured success payload when ok is true
errorNoStructured error payload when ok is false

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.0.9
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • changedOutput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.11.5
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"The unique identifier of the usage limit"New value: +"Usage-limit policy UUID to archive"
    • addedInput schema / properties / id / minLength
      Added value: +1
  3. Addedv1.0.1
  4. Removed
  5. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Although annotations already mark it destructive/non-idempotent, the description adds important semantics: this is an archive operation and the historical record remains available rather than being permanently removed. It does not address duplicate/already-archived behavior or permissions, so not a 5.

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?

Two tight sentences: the action and identifier are front-loaded, followed by the key retention behavior. No redundant explanation.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a low-complexity, one-parameter tool with full schema coverage, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description covers the essential action and its archive/retention consequence. It leaves only alternative-selection guidance and idempotency details unstated.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, and the only parameter is already described as 'Usage-limit policy UUID to archive'; the description only restates 'by id'. With the schema carrying parameter meaning, baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses the specific verb 'Archive' with the resource 'cumulative usage-limit policy' and identifies the required id, so the action is clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from update_usage_limit or reset_usage_limit_entity, which prevents a 5.

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?

It describes the effect of archiving, implying the use case of stopping budget enforcement while retaining historical records, but never states when to choose this over update_usage_limit or reset_usage_limit_entity or when not to use it. This is implied usage rather than explicit guidance.

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