Skip to main content
Glama
cgize

MCP Think Tool Server

clear_thoughts

Reset the current reasoning session to start with a clean slate. This tool clears all recorded thoughts, enabling a fresh approach to structured problem-solving within the MCP Think Tool Server.

Instructions

Clear all thoughts recorded in the current session. Use this to start fresh if the thinking process needs to be reset.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The asynchronous handler function for the clear_thoughts tool. It retrieves the current length of thoughtsLog, clears the array, and returns a confirmation message with the number of cleared thoughts.
      async () => {
        const count = this.thoughtsLog.length;
        this.thoughtsLog = [];
        
        return {
          content: [{ type: "text", text: `Cleared ${count} recorded thoughts.` }]
        };
      }
    );
  • src/index.ts:76-87 (registration)
    Registration of the clear_thoughts tool using this.server.tool(), including the tool name, description, and inline handler function.
    this.server.tool(
      "clear_thoughts",
      "Clear all thoughts recorded in the current session. Use this to start fresh if the thinking process needs to be reset.",
      async () => {
        const count = this.thoughtsLog.length;
        this.thoughtsLog = [];
        
        return {
          content: [{ type: "text", text: `Cleared ${count} recorded thoughts.` }]
        };
      }
    );
  • Private class property storing the array of thoughts, which is cleared by the clear_thoughts handler.
    private thoughtsLog: ThoughtRecord[] = [];
  • TypeScript interface defining the structure of thought records stored in thoughtsLog.
    interface ThoughtRecord {
      timestamp: string;
      thought: string;
    }
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool clears 'all thoughts' (implying a destructive operation) and specifies scope ('in the current session'), which is useful behavioral context. However, it doesn't mention potential side effects (e.g., irreversible deletion, no confirmation prompt) or response behavior, leaving gaps in transparency.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action ('Clear all thoughts...') followed by usage guidance. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it appropriately sized and efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (destructive operation with 0 parameters), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It explains what the tool does and when to use it but lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., confirmation, error handling) and output expectations, leaving room for improvement in completeness.

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 tool has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (though empty). The description doesn't need to explain parameters, so it naturally meets expectations. A baseline of 4 is appropriate as no parameter information is required, and the description focuses on tool behavior instead.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Clear all thoughts') and the target resource ('thoughts recorded in the current session'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_thoughts' (which retrieves thoughts) or 'think' (which presumably creates thoughts), missing the opportunity for full sibling distinction.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides clear context on when to use this tool ('to start fresh if the thinking process needs to be reset'), which implies a reset scenario. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives (e.g., using 'get_thoughts' to review instead of clear), falling short of full explicit guidance.

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

Related 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/cgize/claude-mcp-think-tool'

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