vaultwarden_post_clear_device_tokenClears a device's push token by device ID, stopping associated push notifications and resetting its notification registration.
Clear a device push token (POST alias)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| form | No | ||
| params | No | ||
| device_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 readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say what "clearing" does (device stops receiving push notifications?), whether the operation is idempotent, whether authentication as the device owner is required, or what a false destructiveHint means for a remove-like action.
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 with no filler, action front-loaded. It is efficient but so terse that the parenthetical carries weight it cannot bear.
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?
A mutation tool with 0% parameter documentation, no output schema, and no explanation of effect or auth requirements. Annotations only cover safety hints, so the description needed to explain the operation's consequences and parameters; it does neither.
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 four parameters are undocumented, so the description must compensate and does not. It never mentions device_id (the only required parameter) or the form/params/json_body passthrough objects, so an agent has no basis for populating them.
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 ("Clear a device push token"), which is unambiguous. The parenthetical "(POST alias)" gestures at the sibling vaultwarden_put_clear_device_token but never explains whether the two differ in behavior or are interchangeable.
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 over vaultwarden_put_clear_device_token, vaultwarden_post_device_token, or vaultwarden_put_device_token. "(POST alias)" implies an alternative exists without saying how to choose, leaving the agent to guess.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.