vaultwarden_post_sstampRotates your account security stamp to invalidate all other active sessions and JWTs, forcing re-authentication everywhere else. Use it after a suspected compromise or credential change.
Rotate security stamp (invalidates all other sessions/JWTs)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| form | No | ||
| 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?
The description adds real behavioral value beyond the annotations: it names exactly what is invalidated (all other sessions/JWTs), which the agent could not learn from readOnlyHint=false / destructiveHint=false / openWorldHint=true. It does not state whether the current session survives or whether the call requires re-authentication.
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 front-loaded clause; the operation and its consequence appear immediately with zero filler. Nothing could be removed without losing 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?
The core semantics are covered, but for a mutation tool with no output schema and three undocumented parameters, the definition stops short of what an agent needs to invoke it confidently (auth requirements, required-before-call state, response shape).
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 coverage is 0% across three generic parameters (form, params, json_body) and the description says nothing about which one carries what. For a stamp-rotation call, the agent has no basis for deciding whether a body is required or can be omitted.
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 ("Rotate security stamp") plus the user-visible consequence (all other sessions/JWTs invalidated). It does not distinguish this from related siblings such as vaultwarden_deauth_user, vaultwarden_post_rotatekey, or vaultwarden_accounts_rotate_api_key, which also revoke access.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this versus the other session-revocation tools in the sibling list, nor any precondition (e.g., must be authenticated as the target user). The agent must infer intent from the parenthetical alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.