ZeroDB Agent Memory MCP Server

zerodb_clear_session

Delete a session's complete memory history permanently. Confirmation required; can keep important or permanent memories.

Instructions

Clear all memories for a session. Use with caution - this permanently deletes conversation history.

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": {
      "session_id": "<session_id>",
      "confirm": "<confirm>"
    },
    "name": "zerodb_clear_session"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`confirm`	Yes	Confirmation flag - must be true to execute
`session_id`	Yes	Session identifier to clear memories for
`keep_important`	No	Keep memories tagged as "important" or "permanent"

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.2.7Aug 1, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The description discloses the destructive nature (permanently deletes conversation history), which is important given no annotations are present. However, it fails to mention the required confirmation flag and the optional keep_important behavior that can prevent deletion of important memories, making the claim 'Clear all memories' potentially misleading.

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 very concise, with two short sentences that front-load the action and include a necessary caution. Every word serves a purpose with no extraneous details.

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 annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It omits the confirmation requirement and the conditional nature of deletion via keep_important, leaving the agent without critical context to safely invoke the operation.

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?

The schema provides descriptions for all three parameters (100% coverage), so the description adds no additional parameter semantics. Per the rubric, baseline 3 is appropriate when schema coverage is high.

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 states the action: 'Clear all memories for a session' with a specific verb and resource. It also notes the permanent deletion of conversation history, distinguishing it from sibling tools like store or search.

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 provides a caution ('Use with caution') and warns about permanent deletion, which implies when not to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or specific scenarios where this tool should be preferred, leaving usage guidelines somewhat implied.

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

Deploy Server