Vaultbeat MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Start pairing (invalidates any open QR)

vaultbeat_start_binding

Destructive

Initialize a binding session: generate a keypair and return a QR payload for the user to scan in the Vaultbeat iOS app to authorize this AI server, without disturbing existing credentials.

Instructions

Initialize a binding session: generates a keypair (if needed) and returns a QR payload that the user scans in the Vaultbeat iOS app to authorize this AI server.

⚠️ If the user says they cannot see the QR code, believe them. Many terminals and most agent transcripts drop the block characters it is drawn with, so the payload can reach you intact while their screen shows a blank gap — do not assert that it is there. Have them run uvx vaultbeat-apple-health bind in a real terminal instead.

Returns qr_payload_json — a JSON string the AI should render as a QR code for the user to scan, plus poll_id to pass to vaultbeat_poll_binding. After the user scans, call vaultbeat_poll_binding to complete authorization. The iOS path is Settings → Data & AI → Connect an AI server.

Opening a session does NOT disturb an existing binding: the current credentials keep working until a scan actually lands, and are only replaced at that moment. (Before 2026-08-11 this call wiped them up front, so an agent "just re-checking" silently unbound its owner.)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`server_name`	No		Local AI Server

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.8.1Sep 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description clarifies exactly what is and is not invalidated: an open QR is invalidated, but existing credentials keep working until a scan lands. It also discloses the historical behavior before 2026-08-11, preventing an agent with stale knowledge from silently unbinding a user.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose, and every paragraph earns its place: the QR-rendering warning prevents a real failure mode, the return/poll guidance completes the workflow, and the historical note prevents dangerous misuse.

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?

The description covers the full binding flow, output usage, fallback behavior, and safety nuances. It is slightly incomplete only because it leaves `server_name` unexplained, though the schema default makes this a minor gap.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description never mentions the only parameter, `server_name`. The schema's title and default give some hint, but the tool description itself adds no meaning about what value to pass or how it is used.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and object: 'Initialize a binding session', then specifies what the call does (generates a keypair if needed) and what it returns (a QR payload). It clearly differentiates itself from vaultbeat_poll_binding by positioning itself as the start of the flow.

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?

It explicitly says to call vaultbeat_poll_binding after the user scans, gives a concrete fallback command (`uvx vaultbeat-apple-health bind`) when QR rendering fails, and explains that this call does not disturb an existing binding. The 'when to use' and 'what to do instead' guidance is direct and actionable.

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