Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
portkey-admin-mcp

portkey-admin-mcp

by CodesWhat
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

get_egress_allowlist_entry

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read a single organisation egress allowlist entry to inspect its trusted domain, description, and audit fields before changing or deleting that destination; returns details or HTTP 404 if missing.

Instructions

Read one organisation egress allowlist entry's trusted domain, description, and audit fields. Use this before changing or deleting a destination. Returns entry details, or HTTP 404 if it is missing; requires organisation permission.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "get_egress_allowlist_entry"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesEgress allowlist entry UUID from list_egress_allowlist or create_egress_allowlist_entry

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. Addedv1.0.8

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine extra context: the org-level permission requirement and the 404-on-missing failure mode, which the annotations cannot express.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Three short sentences: what it reads, when to use it, then what it returns and what it requires. Front-loaded and free of padding, though the final sentence packs three separate facts (return fields, 404, permission) together.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values need not be spelled out; the description still names the key fields. For a single-parameter, annotation-covered read tool, permission and error behavior are the only real gaps and both are addressed.

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 id parameter already explains it is a UUID sourced from list_egress_allowlist or create_egress_allowlist_entry. The description adds nothing about the parameter, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Read one organisation egress allowlist entry") and enumerates the fields it exposes (trusted domain, description, audit fields). This clearly separates it from list_egress_allowlist (many entries) and the update/delete siblings (mutation).

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

"Use this before changing or deleting a destination" gives a concrete pre-mutation read-before-write pattern. It stops short of naming update_egress_allowlist_entry or delete_egress_allowlist_entry explicitly, so the routing cue is inferred rather than stated.

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