Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
kernl

kernl

by fastslack
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

kernel_graph_scratch

Run read/write Cypher queries in a private, in-memory scratch graph to draft plans, map dependencies, or reshape graph slices without touching the main graph.

Instructions

Run Cypher — reads AND writes — in your own private, in-memory scratch graph: a working space for plans, dependency maps or a slice of the main graph you want to reshape (see kernel_graph_slice). It belongs to your run, nobody else sees it, and it is wiped when the run ends or after 30 idle minutes. At most 20000 nodes; no LOAD CSV, no apoc/gds/dbms. The main graph is never touched.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "cypher": "<cypher>"
    },
    "name": "kernel_graph_scratch"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
cypherYes
paramsNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.1

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so well: it discloses read/write capability, per-run privacy, end-of-run or 30-idle-minute wipe behavior, node cap, forbidden functions, and that the main graph is untouched. These are exactly the operational constraints an agent needs before invoking a scratch graph 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 front-loaded with the core action and scope, then adds isolation, lifetime, limits, forbidden functions, and safety in compact clauses. Every sentence contributes operational information, and there is no redundant or filler wording.

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 complex read/write Cypher scratch tool, the description covers the essential behavioral envelope: privacy, lifetime, capacity, restrictions, and isolation from the main graph. Output schema exists, so return values need not be described, but the lack of parameter semantics for limit and params is the main remaining completeness gap.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate for all three parameters. It only makes the cypher parameter obvious through 'Run Cypher'; it does not explain the purpose or format of params, nor the meaning or effect of limit, leaving two parameters undocumented in both schema and description.

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 states a specific verb and resource: run Cypher in a private in-memory scratch graph, with reads and writes allowed. It clearly distinguishes this from the main graph and points to kernel_graph_slice for slicing, so an agent can identify what the tool is for without inspecting the schema.

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?

It gives clear usage context: a working space for plans, dependency maps, or reshaping a slice of the main graph, and references kernel_graph_slice as the related tool. It stops short of explicitly saying when not to use this versus querying the main graph, but the isolation and main-graph-safety wording strongly imply the boundary.

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