keychain_encodeBase64-encode plain text without altering your vault. Ideal for preparing values for secure storage or comparisons using the Bitwarden CLI.
Base64-encode a string with bw encode. This never mutates the vault; it only returns encoded text.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| value | Yes | Plain text value to base64-encode. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| encoded | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
v0.2.19Input schema / properties / value / descriptionAdded value: +"Plain text value to base64-encode."Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "encoded": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "encoded"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}v0.1.20Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description reinforces the readOnlyHint annotation by stating it never mutates the vault, adding clarity that it only returns encoded text.
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?
The description is two short sentences, no superfluous words, and immediately conveys the core function.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity, the description, schema, and annotations together provide complete information for an agent to use it correctly.
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?
Schema coverage is 100%, and the description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides for the single parameter.
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?
The description clearly states the tool base64-encodes a string and differentiates it from sibling tools by noting it never mutates the vault.
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?
The description implies when to use it (when encoding is needed) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
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