vaultwarden_post_organization_collection_deleteDeletes a collection from an organization on a Vaultwarden/Bitwarden-compatible server by passing org_id and col_id.
Delete a collection (POST alias)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| form | No | ||
| col_id | Yes | ||
| 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 destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description only confirms the deleted resource and HTTP method; it says nothing about what is destroyed beyond the collection itself, whether it is reversible, or what permissions are required.
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?
Extremely terse for a destructive tool with five parameters. It is front-loaded but under-specified rather than efficient, omitting any structure that would help an agent call it correctly.
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?
Destructive mutation with five parameters at 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and minimally informative annotations. The description does not come close to supplying the context an agent needs to invoke this safely and 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 the description provides no parameter information. org_id and col_id are inferable from their names, but form, params, and json_body are opaque and left 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?
States a specific verb (Delete) and resource (collection), and adds '(POST alias)' to distinguish it from the sibling vaultwarden_delete_organization_collection. An agent can tell what it does, though it doesn't differentiate from bulk delete variants.
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 POST alias versus the DELETE sibling or the bulk delete tool. The parenthetical hints at an HTTP method variant but doesn't explain the selection criteria or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.