vaultwarden_post_organization_collection_updateUpdates an existing organization collection by organization and collection ID, enabling AI agents to modify collection details through the Vaultwarden-compatible server.
Update 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 readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds no behavioral context such as required permissions, what collection fields can be changed, or whether updates are partial or full. It does not contradict the annotations.
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 short sentence with no wasted words and the core action is front-loaded. However, it is so terse that the parenthetical adds little useful information.
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 five undocumented parameters, no output schema, and only sparse annotations, the description is far too thin. An agent cannot infer how to populate required or optional parameters from this description.
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 there are five parameters, including unclear generic fields like form, params, and json_body. The description provides no parameter meaning at all, so it fails to compensate for the schema gap.
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 states a clear verb and resource: "Update a collection." The parenthetical "(POST alias)" hints at the HTTP method but does not explain how this differs from sibling tools like vaultwarden_put_organization_collection_update or vaultwarden_post_collections_update.
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 is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The only clue is "POST alias," which implies another POST-based collection update path exists, but it does not state 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.