reveal_secret_via_send

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

The description discloses critical behavioral traits beyond annotations: client-side encryption, URL fragment never sent to the server, READ_ONLY blocking, and DRY_RUN logging. This adds substantial value beyond the sparse annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true) and fully informs the agent of side effects and constraints.

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

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

The description is four sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and each sentence delivers meaningful behavioral or operational detail without redundancy. It is concise yet comprehensive.

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

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

The description thoroughly covers behavior, restrictions, and encryption details, but it omits any mention of the tool's output or return value (e.g., the Send URL or confirmation). Since there is no output schema, this is a notable gap that prevents full completeness.

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

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

The input schema already provides complete parameter descriptions with defaults, ranges, and field options (100% coverage). The description only generically mentions 'configurable TTL and max-views limit' without adding any new semantic detail, so the baseline of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb ('Reveal') and resource ('vault secret through a Bitwarden Send'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_totp_code or list_vault_items. The purpose is immediately understandable and unique.

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

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

The description gives clear context for when to use the tool (creating a one-time E2E-encrypted URL to reveal a secret) and even notes edge cases like READ_ONLY and DRY_RUN. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it lacks full exclusionary guidance.

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