Skip to main content
Glama

Receive

keychain_receive
Read-only

Retrieve and access secure Bitwarden Send content from a URL, enabling JSON object extraction or file downloads for vault management.

Instructions

Access a Bitwarden Send from a url. Use obj=true for JSON object; downloadFile=true for file content. (bw receive)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYes
passwordNo
objNo
downloadFileNo

Implementation Reference

  • The tool 'receive' (often referred to as keychain_receive when prefixed) is implemented in registerTools.ts. It calls sdk.receive(input).
      `${deps.toolPrefix}.receive`,
      {
        title: 'Receive',
        description:
          'Access a Bitwarden Send from a url. Use obj=true for JSON object; downloadFile=true for file content. (bw receive)',
        annotations: { readOnlyHint: true, openWorldHint: true },
        inputSchema: {
          url: z.string(),
          password: z.string().optional(),
          obj: z.boolean().optional(),
          downloadFile: z.boolean().optional(),
        },
        _meta: toolMeta,
      },
      async (input, extra) => {
        const sdk = await deps.getSdk(extra.authInfo);
        const result = await sdk.receive(input);
        return {
          structuredContent: { result },
          content: [{ type: 'text', text: 'OK' }],
        };
      },
    );
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true (safe operation) and openWorldHint=true (can access external resources), which the description doesn't contradict. The description adds context about accessing Bitwarden Sends and optional behaviors for JSON or file content, but doesn't disclose rate limits, authentication needs beyond the password parameter, or what happens with invalid URLs. With annotations covering safety, it adds some value but lacks rich behavioral details.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose. The second sentence efficiently explains parameter usage. There's no wasted text, but it could be slightly more structured (e.g., separating purpose from parameter guidance).

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?

Given no output schema, the description doesn't explain return values. With annotations covering safety, it adds basic purpose and parameter hints. However, for a tool with 4 parameters (0% schema coverage) and no output schema, it should provide more complete guidance on all parameters and expected behavior to be fully helpful.

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

Parameters3/5

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 parameter documentation. The description mentions 'obj=true for JSON object; downloadFile=true for file content', explaining two parameters (obj and downloadFile) but not url or password. It adds meaning for those two parameters, but leaves url and password unexplained. With 4 parameters total and partial coverage, it compensates somewhat but not fully.

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 ('Access a Bitwarden Send') and resource ('from a url'), making the purpose understandable. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on receiving/accessing Sends rather than creating, editing, or deleting them. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with 'keychain_send_get' which might have overlapping functionality.

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 when needing to access a Bitwarden Send via URL, with optional parameters for JSON object or file content. It mentions 'Use obj=true for JSON object; downloadFile=true for file content' which provides some guidance on parameter usage. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'keychain_send_get' or other retrieval tools, nor does it mention prerequisites like having the URL or password.

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