lmstudio

LM Studio: delete sessions

session_delete

DestructiveIdempotent

Deletes a specified session and its associated tasks by ID, or clears all sessions while keeping loaded models available.

Instructions

Delete a session (or all of them) with its tasks. Loaded models stay loaded.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "session_delete"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`all`	No	Delete every session.
`session_id`	No	Session id from session_start or session_get.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 11, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description still earns credit by disclosing two facts not in the annotations: the deletion cascades to associated tasks, and loaded models are deliberately left intact — exactly the 'what gets destroyed / what survives' context that matters for a destructive tool.

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, zero filler, and the primary action is front-loaded before the side-effect caveat. Nothing is repeated from the title or annotations.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a two-optional-parameter destructive tool with no output schema and full annotation coverage, the description is nearly sufficient. The one gap is the zero-required-parameter case: it never says whether calling with no arguments is an error or deletes nothing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented and the baseline applies. The description loosely maps 'all of them' to the `all` flag, but adds no format, precedence, or mutual-exclusion detail (e.g. what wins if both `all` and `session_id` are passed).

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a session') plus a cascade scope ('with its tasks') and a bulk variant ('or all of them'). No sibling is named, but no other sibling in the list is a delete operation, so the intent is unambiguous from the name-plus-description pair.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: an agent knows to call this to remove sessions, and the 'Loaded models stay loaded' clause gives one decision-relevant condition. There is no explicit when-not guidance, no prerequisite (e.g. whether tasks must be cancelled first), and no mention of what happens if neither argument is supplied.

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