Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Base de Conhecimento

by io.github.mcp-dir
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

kb_remove_document

Remove um ou mais documentos da base (apaga o original, os chunks e o índice). Aceita uma lista de ids.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "document_ids": "<document_ids>"
    },
    "name": "kb_remove_document"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountNo
document_idsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

The description states the tool deletes original, chunks, and index, which is destructive, but the annotations declare destructiveHint: false. This directly contradicts the description's claim, so transparency collapses.

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?

Two short sentences convey the action and input format without redundancy. Efficient and front-loaded.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should explain return behavior or side effects. It mentions deletions but not response types, irreversibility, or error cases. Combined with the annotation contradiction, it's incomplete for a destructive operation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description explains document_ids as a list of ids, but the account parameter is completely unspecified. With 0% schema coverage, the description should clarify both parameters but only partially addresses one.

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?

The description clearly identifies the action ('Remove...documentos da base') and the resource, and specifies what gets deleted (original, chunks, index). It distinguishes from sibling tools like kb_add_text and kb_get_document by focusing on removal.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies use when documents need to be removed, but provides no explicit exclusions, prerequisites, or guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives (though no direct alternative exists). It is adequate but minimal.

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

All Base de Conhecimento toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources