Skip to main content
Glama
brukhabtu

Datadog MCP Server

by brukhabtu

ListApplicationKeys

Retrieve and manage all application keys for your organization using query parameters like sorting, filtering by date, or including related resources.

Instructions

List all application keys available for your org

Query Parameters:

  • page[size]: Size for a given page. The maximum allowed value is 100.

  • page[number]: Specific page number to return.

  • sort: Application key attribute used to sort results. Sort order is ascending by default. In order to specify a descending sort, prefix the attribute with a minus sign.

  • filter: Filter application keys by the specified string.

  • filter[created_at][start]: Only include application keys created on or after the specified date.

  • filter[created_at][end]: Only include application keys created on or before the specified date.

  • include: Resource path for related resources to include in the response. Only owned_by is supported.

Responses:

  • 200 (Success): OK

    • Content-Type: application/json

    • Response Properties:

      • data: Array of application keys.

      • included: Array of objects related to the application key.

    • Example:

{
  "data": [
    "unknown_type"
  ],
  "included": [
    "unknown_type"
  ],
  "meta": "unknown_type"
}
  • 400: Bad Request

    • Content-Type: application/json

    • Response Properties:

      • errors: A list of errors.

    • Example:

{
  "errors": [
    "Bad Request"
  ]
}
  • 403: Forbidden

    • Content-Type: application/json

    • Response Properties:

      • errors: A list of errors.

    • Example:

{
  "errors": [
    "Bad Request"
  ]
}
  • 404: Not Found

    • Content-Type: application/json

    • Response Properties:

      • errors: A list of errors.

    • Example:

{
  "errors": [
    "Bad Request"
  ]
}
  • 429: Too many requests

    • Content-Type: application/json

    • Response Properties:

      • errors: A list of errors.

    • Example:

{
  "errors": [
    "Bad Request"
  ]
}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filterNoFilter application keys by the specified string.
filter[created_at][end]NoOnly include application keys created on or before the specified date.
filter[created_at][start]NoOnly include application keys created on or after the specified date.
includeNoResource path for related resources to include in the response. Only `owned_by` is supported.
page[number]NoSpecific page number to return.
page[size]NoSize for a given page. The maximum allowed value is 100.
sortNoSorting optionsname

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNoArray of application keys.
metaNo
includedNoArray of objects related to the application key.

Implementation Reference

  • The tool 'ListApplicationKeys' is registered by whitelisting the Datadog API endpoint '/api/v2/application_keys' (GET) in the safe_endpoints list. This enables FastMCP.from_openapi to generate the MCP tool that proxies requests to list application keys.
    r"^/api/v2/application_keys$",  # List app keys (no create/delete)
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It implicitly describes a read-only operation through 'List', but doesn't explicitly state safety, permissions, or rate limits. The inclusion of HTTP response codes (200, 400, 403, 404, 429) adds some behavioral context about error conditions and rate limiting, but lacks details on authentication needs or what 'application keys' represent.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is overly long and poorly structured. It includes extensive HTTP response details that belong in an output schema, and repeats parameter information already in the schema. The core purpose is buried under unnecessary sections. While the initial sentence is clear, the rest adds clutter without proportional value.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given 7 parameters with 100% schema coverage and an output schema (implied by response details), the description is moderately complete. It covers the basic operation and includes error responses, but lacks context about what 'application keys' are, their use cases, or relationship to other resources. The output schema existence reduces the need to explain return values, but the description still misses higher-level context.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 7 parameters thoroughly. The description repeats parameter information in the 'Query Parameters' section, adding no meaningful semantic value beyond what's in the schema. This meets the baseline of 3 when schema coverage is high.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'List all application keys available for your org'. This is a specific verb ('List') and resource ('application keys') with scope ('for your org'). However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'ListAPIKeys' or other list tools, which would require explicit comparison.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are multiple sibling list tools (e.g., ListAPIKeys, ListUsers), but no indication of when this specific tool for application keys is appropriate versus others. No prerequisites, exclusions, or context for usage are mentioned.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Related Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/brukhabtu/datadog-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server