In many ways it's a shame when a useful tool turns into a high growth startup. They're going to hire a bunch of developers who will need to justify their existence by adding features, they'll probably eventually either fail or get purchased and shut down. And then all the overly complex applications will start to rot.
What's wrong with saying "this is a useful tool" and leaving it at that?
Particularly if it's a trust-centric product like this. Sure, I wouldn't expect outright secret exfiltration no matter how bad it gets, but switching password management providers isn't exactly what you want to happen on a regular basis. (yes, this form of lock-in has most likely been a big factor in the investment decision)
What's wrong with saying "this is a useful tool" and leaving it at that?