vaultwarden_post_org_keysUploads an organization’s RSA keypair during organization creation, enabling encrypted vault access and key-based sharing for members.
Upload the organization’s RSA keypair at org-creation time
| 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 indicate this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, open-world operation. The description adds lifecycle context but does not explain permissions, whether existing keys can be overwritten, or any security implications of uploading an organization RSA keypair.
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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It immediately states what is uploaded and when.
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 mutation tool with four undocumented parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It omits parameter semantics, required permissions, and how this operation relates to organization creation siblings.
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 the four parameters are generic names (form, org_id, params, json_body). The description says the payload is an RSA keypair, but it does not map that content to any parameter or clarify what form/params/json_body contain.
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 gives a specific verb and resource (upload the organization's RSA keypair) and adds lifecycle context (at org-creation time). It is clear, though it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools such as vaultwarden_post_keys or vaultwarden_create_organization.
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?
The phrase 'at org-creation time' gives a clear usage window, implying this should be called during organization setup. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use it, but the timing guidance is meaningful.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.