Skip to main content
Glama
bruhsb
by bruhsb

paperclip_rotate_secret

Destructive

Rotate a secret's value, incrementing its version to replace compromised or expiring credentials while preserving previous references.

Instructions

⚠ Board-only: Rotate a secret's value, incrementing its version. Increments the secret version (v1 → v2 → v3). Previous references to the secret remain valid for older versions unless specifically purged.

Args:

  • secretId: string — Secret UUID

  • value: string — New secret value (stored encrypted, never returned)

  • externalRef: string | null (optional) — Updated external reference after rotation (null to clear)

Returns: Updated secret metadata with incremented latestVersion: id, companyId, name, provider, externalRef, latestVersion, description, timestamps. Value is never returned.

Examples:

  • Use when: rotating a compromised or expiring credential; each call increments latestVersion

  • Don't use when: you only need to rename or update metadata without changing the value — use paperclip_update_secret instead

Error Handling:

  • 404: secret not found → verify secretId with paperclip_list_secrets

  • 401: authentication failed → check PAPERCLIP_API_KEY

  • 403: permission denied → this tool requires a board (human-user) API key

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
secretIdYesSecret UUID
valueYesNew secret value — increments the version
externalRefNoNew external reference after rotation (null to clear)
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description discloses key behavioral traits beyond annotations: rotation increments version, previous versions remain valid unless purged, value is stored encrypted and never returned. It also notes the need for a board API key, which is not in annotations. No contradiction with destructiveHint=true.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with sections (warning, args, returns, examples, error handling) and is front-loaded with the core purpose. While fairly long, most sentences add value. Could be slightly more concise, but still effective.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive action with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, parameters, return behavior, error handling, and alternatives. It provides sufficient context for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, providing a baseline of 3. The description adds extra meaning: it explains that the 'value' parameter increments the secret version, and 'externalRef' is an updated external reference after rotation. It also describes the return metadata including incremented latestVersion.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: rotating a secret's value and incrementing its version. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'paperclip_update_secret' by specifying when not to use it. The verb 'rotate' and resource 'secret' are precise.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit usage guidelines are provided, including when to use (rotating compromised or expiring credentials) and when not to use (renaming or updating metadata, with a pointer to paperclip_update_secret). Error handling instructions for 404, 401, 403 are also given.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/bruhsb/paperclip-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server