Skip to main content
Glama
kiraa06
by kiraa06

add_credential

Store a credential using name, alias, URL, and tag lookup keys so agents can retrieve it later without exposing secrets in chat.

Instructions

Store a new credential. Keys the agent can later look it up by: name, aliases, urls (full URLs, bare hosts, or wildcards like *.corp.com), and tags.

secret_source (how the main secret is obtained — prefer ones that keep it out of the chat):
  prompt    (default) user types it into a secure macOS dialog
  clipboard read from clipboard, then clear it (user copies it first)
  file      read from `secret_file` (great for SSH keys / service-account JSON)
  generate  create a strong random password/passphrase
  value     use `secret` as given (only if the user already pasted it in chat)
  none      no main secret (e.g. only extra_secrets / notes)
`secret_field` overrides the field name (default depends on type: password/token/key/...).
`extra_secrets` e.g. {"totp_secret": "JBSW..."} or {"api_secret": "..."}.
`fields` = non-secret extras, e.g. {"host": "db.internal", "port": "5432", "region": "ap-south-1"}.
policy: open | confirm | sealed | strict (default from config).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
tagsNo
typeNopassword
urlsNo
notesNo
fieldsNo
policyNo
secretNo
aliasesNo
usernameNo
expires_atNo
rotate_daysNo
secret_fileNo
secret_fieldNo
extra_secretsNo
generate_kindNopassword
secret_sourceNoprompt
generate_lengthNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-destructive write operation (readOnlyHint false, destructiveHint false), and the description adds valuable behavioral detail about secret handling, such as clipboard clearing, secure macOS prompt, and generated secrets. It does not state prerequisites like whether the vault must be unlocked, which leaves a behavioral gap.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose and lookup keys before detailing secret_source. The bullet-style list for secret_source is structured and readable, though the description unevenly spends space on some parameters while omitting others.

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 an 18-parameter credential-creation tool with no schema descriptions and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It covers several key fields well but leaves many parameters and the vault/auth state unaddressed, which is a significant gap for a highly parameterized tool.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description must compensate, and it does explain name, aliases, urls, tags, secret_source, secret_field, extra_secrets, fields, and policy. However, it leaves many parameters undocumented, including type enum values, notes, username, expires_at, rotate_days, generate_kind, and generate_length.

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

Purpose5/5

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

Starts with a specific verb and resource: 'Store a new credential.' The word 'new' distinguishes this from update_credential and other sibling mutation tools, so an agent can identify its role without opening the schema.

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?

Offers no explicit guidance on when to choose add_credential over siblings or when not to use it. The only preference note—'prefer ones that keep it out of the chat'—concerns the secret_source parameter, not tool selection.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.