Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mem0-mcp-selfhosted

mem0-mcp-selfhosted

by elvismdev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

delete_all_memories

Bulk delete all memories within a user, agent, or run scope. Requires at least one filter to target the collection for safe removal.

Instructions

Bulk-delete all memories in the given scope. Requires at least one filter.

    NEVER calls memory.delete_all() — uses safe bulk-delete instead.

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": "delete_all_memories"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
user_idNoUser scope to delete.
agent_idNoAgent scope to delete.
run_idNoRun scope to delete.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.2

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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 discloses that the tool does not call raw delete_all but uses a safe bulk-delete, implying safety. However, it omits details on destructiveness, reversibility, or auth needs, which are important for a deletion 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?

The description is highly concise: two sentences that front-load the purpose and key constraint (requires filter). Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

While the description covers purpose and filter requirement, it lacks return value information. There is no output schema to compensate, so the agent is left guessing about what the tool returns (e.g., count, confirmation). For a bulk deletion tool, this is a notable gap.

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% with clear descriptions for each parameter (run_id, user_id, agent_id). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb ('Bulk-delete') and resource ('all memories in the given scope'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'delete_memory' by specifying bulk operation and requiring a filter.

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 explicitly says 'Requires at least one filter,' providing clear usage context. It also notes the safe bulk-delete implementation, but does not explicitly mention alternatives like 'delete_memory' for single deletions or when not to use.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools