portkey-admin-mcp

get_secret_reference

Read-onlyIdempotent

Look up a Portkey secret reference by UUID or slug to view metadata and masked auth config without exposing resolved secret values.

Instructions

Retrieve one Secret Reference by UUID or slug. Portkey masks sensitive authentication fields for non-system users; the tool returns metadata and the masked auth configuration, not the resolved external secret value.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Secret Reference UUID or slug

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes	Whether the tool call succeeded and returned structured data
`data`	No	Structured success payload when ok is true
`error`	No	Structured error payload when ok is false

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedv0.12.2Oct 2, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / created_at / pattern

Previous value: -"^(?:(?:\\d\\d[2468][048]|\\d\\d[13579][26]|\\d\\d0[48]|[02468][048]00|[13579][26]00)-02-29|\\d{4}-(?:(?:0[13578]|1[02])-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|3[01])|(?:0[469]|11)-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|30)|(?:02)-(?:0[1-9]|1\\d|2[0-8])))T(?:(?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d(?::[0-5]\\d(?:\\.\\d+)?)?(?:Z))$"New value: +"^(?:(?:\\d\\d[2468][048]|\\d\\d[13579][26]|\\d\\d0[48]|[02468][048]00|[13579][26]00)-02-29|\\d{4}-(?:(?:0[13578]|1[02])-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|3[01])|(?:0[469]|11)-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|30)|(?:02)-(?:0[1-9]|1\\d|2[0-8])))T(?:(?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d:[0-5]\\d(?:\\.\\d+)?(?:Z))$"

removedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / description / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

addedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / description / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```

changedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / last_updated_at / pattern

Previous value: -"^(?:(?:\\d\\d[2468][048]|\\d\\d[13579][26]|\\d\\d0[48]|[02468][048]00|[13579][26]00)-02-29|\\d{4}-(?:(?:0[13578]|1[02])-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|3[01])|(?:0[469]|11)-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|30)|(?:02)-(?:0[1-9]|1\\d|2[0-8])))T(?:(?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d(?::[0-5]\\d(?:\\.\\d+)?)?(?:Z))$"New value: +"^(?:(?:\\d\\d[2468][048]|\\d\\d[13579][26]|\\d\\d0[48]|[02468][048]00|[13579][26]00)-02-29|\\d{4}-(?:(?:0[13578]|1[02])-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|3[01])|(?:0[469]|11)-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|30)|(?:02)-(?:0[1-9]|1\\d|2[0-8])))T(?:(?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d:[0-5]\\d(?:\\.\\d+)?(?:Z))$"

removedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / secret_key / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

addedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / secret_key / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```

Addedv0.5.0Jul 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: Portkey masks sensitive auth fields for non-system users and the tool returns metadata plus masked auth config rather than the resolved secret. This prevents an agent from expecting a usable credential.

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 sentences, zero filler. The primary action and lookup key come first, and the masking caveat follows immediately as the second most important fact.

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?

With an output schema present, the description needn't document return fields, and the masking caveat covers the main surprise an agent would hit. Minor gaps remain: no behavior described for an unknown UUID/slug or for permission-denied cases, but overall it is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 single parameter's description already states 'Secret Reference UUID or slug', so the schema carries the parameter semantics. The description restates the same accepted identifier forms without adding format, prefix, or error-handling detail. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('one Secret Reference') with the lookup key (UUID or slug). This implicitly distinguishes it from list_secret_references, but it never names a sibling or explicitly contrasts itself with the create/update/delete variants in the same family.

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 'by UUID or slug' phrasing implies you already have an identifier and want a single record, which is useful implied guidance. However, there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no mention of the alternative list_secret_references for discovery, and no prerequisites (e.g., permission needed to see unmasked fields).

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

Deploy Server