Skip to main content
Glama

Send Delete

keychain_send_delete
Destructive

Delete a Bitwarden Send by specifying its ID to remove secure file or text shares from your vault.

Instructions

Delete a Send (bw send delete).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes

Implementation Reference

  • Registration and handler for the `send_delete` tool.
      `${deps.toolPrefix}.send_delete`,
      {
        title: 'Send Delete',
        description: 'Delete a Send (bw send delete).',
        annotations: {
          readOnlyHint: false,
          destructiveHint: true,
          openWorldHint: true,
        },
        inputSchema: {
          id: z.string(),
        },
        _meta: toolMeta,
      },
      async (input, extra) => {
        if (isReadOnly) return readonlyBlocked();
        const sdk = await deps.getSdk(extra.authInfo);
        const result = await sdk.sendDelete(input);
        return {
          structuredContent: { result },
          content: [{ type: 'text', text: 'OK' }],
        };
      },
    );
  • Actual implementation of `sendDelete` in the Keychain SDK, which executes the `bw send delete` CLI command.
    async sendDelete(input: { id: string }): Promise<unknown> {
      return this.bw.withSession(async (session) => {
        const { stdout } = await this.bw.runForSession(
          session,
          ['send', 'delete', input.id],
          {
            timeoutMs: 60_000,
          },
        );
        return this.tryParseJson(stdout);
      });
    }
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, confirming this is a destructive write operation. The description adds context by specifying it's for 'Send' objects, which aligns with annotations. However, it doesn't disclose additional behavioral traits like authentication needs, rate limits, or irreversible effects beyond what annotations imply.

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 extremely concise—a single sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action, though this brevity comes at the cost of clarity and completeness.

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?

For a destructive tool with no output schema and 0% schema description coverage, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what a 'Send' is, the implications of deletion, expected outcomes, or error handling. Given the complexity hinted by sibling tools (e.g., keychain_send_create, keychain_send_edit), more context is needed for safe and effective use.

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%, with one parameter 'id' undocumented in the schema. The description doesn't add any parameter details—it doesn't explain what the 'id' represents (e.g., a Send ID from keychain_send_get) or its format. Since there's only one parameter, the baseline is 4, but the lack of semantic information reduces it to 3.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description 'Delete a Send (bw send delete)' states the action (delete) and resource (a Send), but it's vague about what a 'Send' is and doesn't differentiate from sibling deletion tools like keychain_delete_attachment or keychain_delete_folder. It restates the tool name without adding clarity about scope or context.

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. There are multiple deletion tools in the sibling list (e.g., keychain_delete_attachment, keychain_delete_folder), but the description doesn't specify that this is for deleting 'Send' objects specifically or mention prerequisites like needing a Send ID from keychain_send_get or keychain_send_list.

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