vaultwarden_get_org_exportExports all cipher data for a specified organization as an admin-triggered vault export, enabling backup, auditing, or migration of organization vault items.
Export all org cipher data (admin-triggered org vault export)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| form | No | ||
| org_id | Yes | ||
| 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?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that this is an admin-triggered operation, implying elevated privileges are required, which is useful context. It does not disclose output/download format or whether the export is throttled.
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 compact sentence with the essential verb-resource-scope front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient but arguably too terse given the surrounding complexity.
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?
With no output schema and 0% parameter coverage, the description should compensate by describing the export result (file/download vs JSON) and how org_id is supplied. It leaves these gaps, so an agent cannot confidently invoke it beyond guessing.
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 coverage is 0% with 4 parameters, and the description explains none of them. The mention of 'org' implies org_id targets a specific organization, but the generic form/params/json_body wrappers and the format of org_id are entirely undocumented in both schema and description.
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 names a specific verb (Export) and resource (org cipher data), and the parenthetical clarifies it is the admin-triggered org vault export, distinguishing it from import (vaultwarden_post_org_import) and DB-level backup (vaultwarden_backup_db). It is clear but does not explicitly say what it is NOT, so it falls short of a 5.
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 explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance, and no alternatives are named despite many sibling tools touching org vaults (purge_org_vault, post_org_import, backup_db). The 'admin-triggered' note hints at a prerequisite but is not a usage rule.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.