vaultwarden_get_group_membersLists all members of a specific group within a Vaultwarden organization, letting AI agents retrieve group membership using the organization and group IDs.
List members of a group
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| form | No | ||
| org_id | Yes | ||
| params | No | ||
| group_id | Yes | ||
| json_body | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld, so the description carries little burden — but it adds nothing: no mention of pagination, result ordering, permission requirements, or whether disabled members are included.
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?
A single short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource; efficient though it is more under-specified than genuinely concise.
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 five undocumented parameters, no output schema, and only annotations covering safety, the description is too thin — an agent still cannot tell what org_id/group_id mean or what the mysterious form/params/json_body parameters do.
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 opaque ones (form, params, json_body) with no types or descriptions. The description only implies 'a group' is identified; it never mentions that org_id and group_id are both required.
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?
Specific verb+resource: 'List members of a group'. An agent can tell it retrieves group membership, though it doesn't distinguish itself from close siblings like vaultwarden_get_members (org-level) or vaultwarden_get_group_details.
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?
No statement of when to use this versus vaultwarden_get_group_details, vaultwarden_get_members, or vaultwarden_get_collection_users, and no prerequisites such as requiring org admin scope.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.