keychain_sdk_versionCheck the installed Bitwarden CLI version to diagnose compatibility issues without modifying vault data.
Return the Bitwarden CLI version reported by bw --version. Use this read-only check when diagnosing CLI/runtime compatibility without touching vault data.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| version | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.19Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "version": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "version"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}v0.2.18Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Description adds context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by specifying it runs 'bw --version' and does not touch vault data, enhancing transparency.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the main action and purpose, with no wasted words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple version check with no parameters and an output schema present, the description fully covers what the tool does and when to use it.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
No parameters exist, so the description does not need to add parameter info; baseline 4 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states the tool returns the Bitwarden CLI version using a specific command, uniquely distinguishing it from sibling tools that interact with vault data.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly advises using this read-only check for diagnosing CLI/runtime compatibility, implying no vault data is touched, which differentiates it from other tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.