Skip to main content
Glama

Generate Username

keychain_generate_username
Read-only

Generate secure usernames using random words, plus-addressed emails, catch-all emails, or forwarded aliases for Bitwarden vault management.

Instructions

Generate a username like the Bitwarden generator (random word, plus-addressed email, catch-all). Returning the value requires reveal=true.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeNo
capitalizeNo
includeNumberNo
emailNo
domainNo
revealNo

Implementation Reference

  • Registration and handler implementation for the keychain_generate_username tool.
    registerTool(
      `${deps.toolPrefix}.generate_username`,
      {
        title: 'Generate Username',
        description:
          'Generate a username like the Bitwarden generator (random word, plus-addressed email, catch-all). Returning the value requires reveal=true.',
        annotations: { readOnlyHint: true },
        inputSchema: {
          type: z
            .enum([
              'random_word',
              'plus_addressed_email',
              'catch_all_email',
              'forwarded_email_alias',
            ])
            .optional(),
          capitalize: z.boolean().optional(),
          includeNumber: z.boolean().optional(),
          email: z.string().optional(),
          domain: z.string().optional(),
          reveal: z.boolean().optional(),
        },
        _meta: toolMeta,
      },
      async (input, extra) => {
        const sdk = await deps.getSdk(extra.authInfo);
        const result = await sdk.generateUsername(clampReveal(input));
        return {
          structuredContent: toolResult(
            'generated',
            result.value,
            result.revealed,
          ),
          content: [{ type: 'text', text: 'OK' }],
        };
      },
    );
Behavior3/5

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

The annotation declares readOnlyHint=true, which the description doesn't contradict. The description adds useful behavioral context about the reveal parameter requirement for returning values, which isn't covered by annotations. However, it doesn't disclose other behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, or what happens when parameters are omitted.

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 appropriately concise with two sentences. The first sentence establishes purpose and generation methods, while the second provides a critical behavioral requirement. There's no wasted text, though the structure could be slightly improved by front-loading the reveal requirement more clearly.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given 6 parameters with 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and only basic annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how different generation types work, or the relationships between parameters (e.g., when email/domain are required). For a generation tool with multiple configuration options, more context is needed.

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

Parameters2/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage for 6 parameters, the description carries significant burden but adds minimal parameter semantics. It only mentions the 'reveal' parameter requirement and lists some generation types that correspond to the 'type' enum. Most parameters (capitalize, includeNumber, email, domain) receive no explanation in the description.

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 tool's purpose: 'Generate a username like the Bitwarden generator' with specific generation methods listed (random word, plus-addressed email, catch-all). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on username generation specifically, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with similar tools like keychain_generate.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides minimal usage guidance. It mentions that 'Returning the value requires reveal=true' which is a technical requirement, but offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like keychain_generate or keychain_get_username, nor when different generation types are appropriate.

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