hive

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

actor_prune

DestructiveIdempotent

Deletes actors that own no data anywhere and have been inactive for a minute, scanning globally across all projects. Run after project removal to clear orphaned actors.

Instructions

Delete every actor that owns no rows anywhere in the store and has not been active in the last minute: agents.actor_id, agents.parent_actor_id, todos.locked_by, todo_comments.author, kv.updated_by, leases.owner, pads.updated_by, wakes.owner, wakes.deliver_actor, agent_state_log.actor_id. The scan is global across every project, never scoped to the caller's: actors carry no project_id, so an actor can own rows in a project the caller cannot see, and a project-scoped scan would misread that actor as inert and delete it. Never prunes the caller's own actor. Refuses under HIVE_PROJECT_LOCK=1: this is a whole-store sweep. Run this after project_prune when sweeping the store: project_prune with confirm_name removes a non-empty project together with its agents rows, so run this afterwards to clear that project's actors that own nothing else. Actors with agent_state_log rows stay, because that log is append-only and has no project, which means every actor that ever ran a lead or worker stays. Immediate, permanent: no dry-run mode.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`errors`	No
`deleted`	Yes
`held_back`	Yes
`hive_notice`	No
`held_back_live`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.2.2Sep 26, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / hive_notice
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
First observedv1.0.0Sep 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructive=true and idempotent=true, and the description goes well beyond them: the scan is global rather than caller-scoped with an explanation of the misclassification risk, actors with agent_state_log rows are retained, execution is immediate and permanent with no dry-run, and the lock guard is disclosed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the core action and the deletion criteria, and the ordering/lock guidance follows. The long FK-column enumeration is dense but load-bearing for a store-wide sweep, so little is wasted, though the prose could be tightened slightly.

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

Completeness5/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. For a destructive, zero-param, whole-store operation the description supplies scope, retention rules, ordering with project_prune, lock behavior, and irreversibility — everything an agent needs.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a 0-param tool applies. No syntax or format gaps exist.

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?

States a specific verb (Delete) plus a precisely bounded resource (actors owning no rows anywhere and inactive for one minute), and enumerates every FK column scanned. It is unmistakable against siblings such as project_prune and agent_close.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly states when to run it (after project_prune when sweeping the store), when it refuses (HIVE_PROJECT_LOCK=1), and what it never touches (the caller's own actor). It names the sibling alternative project_prune and the ordering between them.

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