vaultwarden_delete_attachment_postDeletes a Vaultwarden attachment by cipher and attachment ID using the POST alias, removing stored files from a vault item.
Delete an attachment (POST alias)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| form | No | ||
| params | No | ||
| cipher_id | Yes | ||
| json_body | No | ||
| attachment_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true. The description adds nothing about irreversibility, required permissions, or side effects, so it does not enrich the behavioral picture beyond the annotations.
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 a single fragment with no wasted words, but it is under-specified for a destructive mutation with five parameters. Brevity here costs clarity rather than serving it.
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?
For a destructive, open-world mutation with five mostly undocumented parameters and no output schema, the description is far too thin. It leaves the agent without enough information to invoke the tool correctly or safely.
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?
Schema description coverage is 0% across five parameters, including required cipher_id and attachment_id. The description just says 'attachment' and does not explain what those identifiers mean, nor the role of form, params, or json_body.
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 and resource ('Delete an attachment') and hints at a POST variant, but the parenthetical '(POST alias)' is vague and does not explain how it differs from the sibling vaultwarden_delete_attachment.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this POST alias instead of vaultwarden_delete_attachment, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer the choice from the sibling name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.