vaultwarden_generate_yubikeyRetrieve the current YubiKey OTP two-factor configuration for a Vaultwarden account with sensitive values masked, so you can verify 2FA settings.
Get current YubiKey OTP 2FA configuration (masked)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| form | No | ||
| params | No | ||
| json_body | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description says 'Get current ... configuration', implying a read operation, but annotations set readOnlyHint=false. The name/title says 'Generate yubikey', further contradicting the read-oriented description. No behavior, side effects, or auth requirements are disclosed.
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 short sentence with no wasted wording and is front-loaded. Its conciseness is undermined by being misleading, but structurally it is efficient.
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 tool with 3 undocumented parameters, no output schema, and contradictory annotations, the description is drastically incomplete. It does not explain what is returned, what the parameters do, or how the operation behaves.
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 schema has 3 parameters (form, params, json_body) with 0% description coverage, and the description mentions none of them. With no parameter meaning provided anywhere, an agent cannot know what to supply for this tool.
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: 'Get current YubiKey OTP 2FA configuration (masked)'. However, this directly conflicts with the tool name and title 'Generate yubikey', making the actual purpose ambiguous to an agent. It also does not distinguish this tool from siblings such as activate_yubikey or get_twofactor.
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 tool versus alternatives like vaultwarden_activate_yubikey or vaultwarden_get_twofactor. The description gives no prerequisites, no context about whether generation is required first, and no exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.