Skip to main content
Glama

Delete Item

keychain_delete_item

Remove a stored credential from your Bitwarden vault by specifying its ID. Choose between soft deletion for recovery or permanent deletion for complete removal.

Instructions

Delete an item by id (soft-delete by default; set permanent=true to hard delete).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
permanentNo

Implementation Reference

  • The 'deleteItem' method in KeychainSdk handles the logic for deleting a Bitwarden item, supporting both soft-delete (default) and hard-delete (permanent=true).
    async deleteItem(input: { id: string; permanent?: boolean }): Promise<void> {
      return this.bw.withSession(async (session) => {
        if (this.syncOnWrite()) {
          await this.bw
            .runForSession(session, ['sync'], { timeoutMs: 120_000 })
            .catch(() => {});
        }
    
        const args = ['delete', 'item', input.id];
        if (input.permanent) args.push('--permanent');
        await this.bw.runForSession(session, args, { timeoutMs: 60_000 });
      });
    }
  • The 'delete_item' MCP tool implementation in registerTools.ts, which invokes the 'deleteItem' method from the KeychainSdk.
    registerTool(
      `${deps.toolPrefix}.delete_folder`,
      {
        title: 'Delete Folder',
        description: 'Delete a Bitwarden folder (personal).',
        inputSchema: {
          id: z.string(),
        },
        _meta: toolMeta,
      },
      async (input, extra) => {
        if (isReadOnly) return readonlyBlocked();
        const sdk = await deps.getSdk(extra.authInfo);
        await sdk.deleteFolder(input);
        return {
          structuredContent: { ok: true },
          content: [{ type: 'text', text: 'Deleted.' }],
        };
      },
    );
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well by disclosing key behavioral traits: it specifies that deletion is soft by default and can be made permanent with a parameter. This clarifies the mutation's impact and options, though it doesn't address permissions, error conditions, or what 'soft-delete' entails (e.g., recoverability).

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and immediately provides critical behavioral detail (soft/hard delete). Every word adds value without redundancy, making it easy to parse quickly.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the basic action and a key parameter nuance adequately. However, it lacks details on prerequisites (e.g., authentication), side effects, or return values, which would be helpful given the tool's destructive potential and the absence of structured metadata.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaningful context for the 'permanent' parameter by explaining its effect (hard vs. soft delete), which isn't evident from the schema alone. However, it doesn't clarify the 'id' parameter (e.g., format or source), leaving some gaps in parameter understanding.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the action ('Delete') and target ('an item by id'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'keychain_delete_folder' or 'keychain_delete_items' by specifying item-level deletion. However, it doesn't explicitly mention what type of item (e.g., login, card, note) is being deleted, which could help differentiate from other delete operations.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage by mentioning the 'permanent' parameter option for hard vs. soft delete, suggesting when to use this variant. However, it doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like 'keychain_delete_items' (bulk deletion) or 'keychain_restore_item' (undoing soft deletes), leaving some ambiguity.

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/icoretech/warden-mcp'

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