vaultwarden_leave_organizationRemoves the current user from a specified organization using its organization ID, allowing them to leave membership and lose associated organization access.
Current user leaves an organization
| 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 declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is partially covered structurally. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say the user loses access to org collections/ciphers, whether the action is reversible (re-invite required), or whether owner/sole-member constraints can block it.
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, front-loaded sentence with no waste, but it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise for a tool with four parameters.
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 mutating membership operation with four undocumented parameters, no output schema, and only structural annotations, the description leaves an agent without the information needed to call it safely or correctly.
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% and org_id is defined as an empty object with no type or format. The description only implies an organization is identified; it gives no detail about the required org_id or the purpose of form/params/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?
States a specific verb and resource ('leaves an organization') and clarifies the actor is the current user, which distinguishes it from admin-side member removal siblings such as revoke_member or delete_member. It is clear but does not explicitly name those siblings.
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 guidance on when to use this instead of vaultwarden_revoke_member, vaultwarden_delete_member, or vaultwarden_organizations_delete_organization. No prerequisites are stated, such as the user needing to be a member or restrictions on sole owners.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.