Skip to main content
Glama
ragflow-kb-mcp
by feci

ragflow_create_chat_session

Start a new chat session with an assistant by providing its chat ID and optional session name; the session opens with the assistant's prologue.

Instructions

Start a new session with a chat assistant; it opens with the assistant's prologue.

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": {
      "chat_id": "<chat_id>"
    },
    "name": "ragflow_create_chat_session"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoSession name; default 'New session'
chat_idYesChat assistant ID

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.1

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false with destructiveHint=false, so an agent already knows this is a non-destructive mutation. The description adds one genuinely non-obvious behavioral fact — the new session is pre-populated with the assistant's prologue message — but says nothing about permissions, limits on session count, or what happens if chat_id is invalid.

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?

A single front-loaded clause with zero filler; the creation verb and the prologue behavior both appear immediately.

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?

An output schema exists and parameters are fully documented, so the description only needs to cover purpose and behavior — which it does, including the prologue detail. It is thin on lifecycle context (what you do with the session afterward, e.g. ragflow_chat), but nothing required for a correct call is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, including the 'New session' default for name, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema (it never mentions chat_id or name).

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 ('Start a new session with a chat assistant'), which distinguishes it from ragflow_create_chat (creates the assistant) and ragflow_create_agent_session (agent sessions). It does not explicitly name those siblings, but the resource scope is unambiguous.

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: the mention of a 'chat assistant' signals that this operates on an existing assistant referenced by chat_id. There is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-not guidance and no reference to ragflow_chat or ragflow_list_chat_sessions as the natural follow-up/routing alternatives.

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