portkey-admin-mcp

update_mcp_integration

DestructiveIdempotent

Update an MCP integration's name, description, URL, auth, transport, headers, or secret mappings, changing only supplied fields; URL, auth, header, and secret changes apply immediately.

Instructions

Update an MCP integration's name, description, URL, auth, transport, headers, or runtime Secret Reference mappings. Only supplied fields change; URL, auth, header, and secret changes apply immediately and can break active clients, so inspect get_mcp_integration first. Use update_mcp_server when changing only a Portkey server instance's display metadata.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	The MCP integration ID or slug to update
`url`	No	New URL endpoint
`name`	No	New display name
`auth_type`	No	New authentication type. Current examples are 'none', 'headers' (custom headers), and 'oauth_auto' (OAuth); Portkey may accept additional values.
`transport`	No	New transport protocol
`description`	No	New description
`configurations`	No	Replacement documented or forward-compatible configuration fields. configurations.custom_headers must be a string-to-string header map when present.
`custom_headers`	No	New custom headers for authentication. Sent via configurations.custom_headers
`secret_mappings`	No	Replacement runtime Secret Reference mappings; each target_field must be unique

Output 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.

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.0.9Oct 26, 2026

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"

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.12.2Oct 2, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / secret_mappings / items / properties / secret_key / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / secret_mappings / items / properties / secret_key / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```

Changed4 schema fields changedv0.11.5Sep 8, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / auth_type / description

Previous value: -"New authentication type"New value: +"New authentication type. Current examples are 'none', 'headers' (custom headers), and 'oauth_auto' (OAuth); Portkey may accept additional values."

removedInput schema / properties / auth_type / enum

Removed value: -[
-  "oauth_auto",
-  "headers",
-  "none"
-]

addedInput schema / properties / auth_type / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```

addedInput schema / properties / configurations

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "description": "Replacement documented or forward-compatible configuration fields. configurations.custom_headers must be a string-to-string header map when present.",
+  "propertyNames": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedAug 9, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / secret_mappings

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Replacement runtime Secret Reference mappings; each target_field must be unique",
+  "items": {
+    "properties": {
+      "secret_key": {
+        "anyOf": [
+          {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          {
+            "type": "null"
+          }
+        ],
+        "description": "Optional key to select from a multi-value secret"
+      },
+      "secret_reference_id": {
+        "description": "Secret Reference UUID or slug accessible to this integration",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "target_field": {
+        "description": "Configuration field resolved at runtime, such as configurations.oauth_metadata",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "value_format": {
+        "anyOf": [
+          {
+            "enum": [
+              "string",
+              "json"
+            ],
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          {
+            "type": "null"
+          }
+        ],
+        "description": "Use json when the target configuration field expects a structured object"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "target_field",
+      "secret_reference_id"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

Addedv1.0.1May 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds substantial context beyond them: partial-update semantics ('Only supplied fields change'), immediate application of URL/auth/header/secret changes, and the concrete consequence that active clients can break. That is exactly the causal, risk-oriented information 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

Three sentences, front-loaded with the resource and updatable fields, followed by the partial-update contract and the risk warning, then the sibling routing rule. No restated boilerplate and nothing that could be cut without losing information.

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 a rich annotation set, a fully documented 9-parameter schema, and an output schema, the description covers what an agent still needs: mutability model, risk, prerequisite read, and alternative tool. The only minor gap is it says nothing about permission or workspace scoping needed to succeed.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns above that by clarifying that unspecified fields are left untouched and by grouping which parameters take effect immediately (URL, auth, headers, secrets). It does not add further detail on the nested secret_mappings structure, but that is already fully documented in the schema.

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 (update) and resource (MCP integration) and enumerates the concrete field groups that can change: name, description, URL, auth, transport, headers, and Secret Reference mappings. It also names the nearest sibling (update_mcp_server) it is not, so an agent can separate it from the similarly-named tool without opening schemas.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives an explicit precondition ('inspect get_mcp_integration first') tied to a stated risk, and an explicit routing rule ('Use update_mcp_server when changing only a Portkey server instance's display metadata'). Both when-to-use and a named alternative are present.

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

Deploy Server