Skip to main content
Glama

clear_thinking_history

Clear all recorded thoughts and reset the server state to remove previous thinking history and start fresh.

Instructions

Clear all recorded thoughts and reset the server state.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • MCP CallToolRequest handler switch case for "clear_thinking_history" that calls thinkingServer.clearHistory() and returns success response.
    case "clear_thinking_history": {
      thinkingServer.clearHistory();
      return {
        content: [{
          type: "text",
          text: JSON.stringify({
            status: "success",
            message: "Thinking history cleared"
          })
        }]
      };
    }
  • Core implementation of clearing the thinking history: resets thoughtHistory array, branches object, calls memoryManager.clear(), and nulls activeBranchId.
    clearHistory(): void {
      this.thoughtHistory = [];
      this.branches = {};
      this.memoryManager.clear();
      this.activeBranchId = null;
    }
  • Tool schema definition including name, description, empty parameters schema, and inputSchema.
    export const clearThinkingHistoryTool: Tool = {
      name: "clear_thinking_history",
      description: "Clear all recorded thoughts and reset the server state.",
      parameters: emptySchema,
      inputSchema: zodToInputSchema(emptySchema)
    };
  • src/tools.ts:83-89 (registration)
    Registration of the clearThinkingHistoryTool in the exported array of all tools, used by listTools handler.
    export const toolDefinitions = [
      captureThoughtTool,
      reviseThoughtTool,
      retrieveRelevantThoughtsTool,
      getThinkingSummaryTool,
      clearThinkingHistoryTool
    ];
  • MemoryManager helper method that clears short-term buffer and long-term storage, called by clearHistory.
    clear(): void {
      this.shortTermBuffer = [];
      this.longTermStorage = {};
    }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool 'clear all recorded thoughts and reset the server state,' implying a destructive mutation, but does not disclose critical behavioral traits like whether this action is irreversible, requires specific permissions, or has side effects on other data. The description is minimal and lacks depth for a tool with such significant impact.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action ('Clear all recorded thoughts') and adds necessary context ('reset the server state'). There is no wasted verbiage, and every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (a destructive reset operation) and the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what 'reset the server state' entails, what data is affected, or what the expected outcome or confirmation looks like. For a high-impact tool with no structured support, more detail is warranted.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately does not discuss parameters, focusing instead on the tool's action. This meets the baseline for tools with no parameters, as it avoids unnecessary details.

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 specific action ('Clear all recorded thoughts') and the resource affected ('reset the server state'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like capture_thought or get_thinking_summary. It uses precise verbs and identifies the scope of the operation.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like revise_thought or retrieve_relevant_thoughts. It lacks context about prerequisites, such as whether this should be used for cleanup or debugging, and does not mention any exclusions or warnings.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Promptly-Technologies-LLC/mcp-structured-thinking'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server