Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
warp-mcp

warp-mcp

by Ringer
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get an API key

key_get
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve metadata and scopes for a specific API key by UUID. Use this to inspect a key found with key_list, requiring the api_keys:read scope.

Instructions

Get one API key's metadata and scopes by key UUID (never the secret). Use to inspect a specific key found via key_list. Requires the api_keys:read scope.

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": {
      "customer_id": "<customer_id>",
      "key_id": "<key_id>"
    },
    "name": "key_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
key_idYesAPI key UUID
customer_idYesYour customer UUID (shown in the WARP portal under Settings)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.2

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds key behavioral detail: 'never the secret' and the required scope 'api_keys:read', providing context beyond annotations.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose and key constraint. No wasted words. Every sentence adds value.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a simple read tool with 2 params and no output schema, the description fully covers purpose, what it returns (metadata and scopes), what it doesn't (secret), how to use it, and permissions needed. Adequate for agent decision-making.

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 has 100% description coverage. Description reinforces that key_id is the UUID to use, but does not add new semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Get' and resource 'API key's metadata and scopes'. Differentiates from siblings by stating 'never the secret' and linking to key_list. Clearly identifies the tool's unique role.

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?

States when to use: 'Use to inspect a specific key found via key_list' and lists required scope. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but implication is clear that it's for metadata only.

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