Skip to main content
Glama

Get URI

keychain_get_uri
Read-only

Retrieve login URIs from a Bitwarden vault by searching with a specific term, enabling secure access to stored credentials.

Instructions

Get a login URI by search term (bw get uri).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
termYes

Implementation Reference

  • The `keychain_get_uri` (registered as `get_uri` in the tool prefix) handler function that executes the `getUri` method via the `KeychainSdk`.
      `${deps.toolPrefix}.get_uri`,
      {
        title: 'Get URI',
        description: 'Get a login URI by search term (bw get uri).',
        annotations: { readOnlyHint: true },
        inputSchema: {
          term: z.string(),
        },
        _meta: toolMeta,
      },
      async (input, extra) => {
        const sdk = await deps.getSdk(extra.authInfo);
        const uri = await sdk.getUri(input);
        return {
          structuredContent: toolResult('uri', uri.value, uri.revealed),
          content: [{ type: 'text', text: 'OK' }],
        };
      },
    );
Behavior3/5

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

The annotation 'readOnlyHint: true' already indicates this is a safe read operation. The description adds minimal behavioral context—it implies searching by term but doesn't specify if it returns exact matches, partial matches, or multiple results. No additional details on permissions, rate limits, or error conditions are provided. The description doesn't contradict annotations, but adds little value beyond them.

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 brief and to the point—a single sentence that states the core function. The parenthetical '(bw get uri)' could be seen as slightly redundant but provides implementation hint. Overall, it's efficiently structured without unnecessary elaboration.

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 the lack of output schema and 0% schema description coverage, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., a single URI string, a list, or an object with metadata), error behaviors, or how the search operates. For a tool with undocumented parameters and no output details, more context is needed to guide effective use.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the schema provides no documentation for the 'term' parameter. The description only mentions 'search term' generically, without explaining what constitutes a valid term (e.g., URI fragment, item name), expected format, or examples. This leaves the parameter's meaning ambiguous, failing to compensate for the schema gap.

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 ('Get') and resource ('login URI'), and specifies it uses a search term. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this tool from similar siblings like 'keychain_get_item' or 'keychain_search_items', which might also retrieve login-related data. The parenthetical '(bw get uri)' provides implementation context but doesn't enhance purpose clarity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools that retrieve data (e.g., 'keychain_get_item', 'keychain_search_items'), the description lacks context about whether this is for specific URI retrieval versus general item search, or any prerequisites like authentication state. It merely restates the basic function without usage boundaries.

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