Skip to main content
Glama

clear_knowledge

Remove all stored knowledge from the SourceSage MCP server graph to reset or update the codebase context efficiently.

Instructions

Clear all knowledge from the graph.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • This is the implementation of the 'clear_knowledge' tool handler. It is decorated with @self.mcp.tool(), which also serves as its registration in the MCP server. The function clears the knowledge graph by creating a new empty KnowledgeGraph instance and saves it to the storage path if specified.
    @self.mcp.tool()
    def clear_knowledge() -> str:
        """Clear all knowledge from the graph."""
        self.knowledge = KnowledgeGraph()
    
        # Save empty knowledge if storage path is set
        if self.storage_path:
            self.knowledge.save_to_file(self.storage_path)
    
        return "Knowledge graph cleared successfully"
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool 'clears all knowledge,' implying a destructive, irreversible action, but doesn't elaborate on side effects (e.g., whether it affects other tools, requires authentication, or has rate limits). For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 a single, direct sentence ('Clear all knowledge from the graph.') with zero wasted words. It front-loads the core action and target, making it highly efficient and easy to parse. Every word earns its place by conveying essential information without 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?

Given the tool's complexity (a destructive operation with no annotations and no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., irreversibility, permissions), usage context, or expected outcomes. For a high-stakes tool like this, more comprehensive guidance is needed to ensure safe and correct invocation.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% description coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters, focusing instead on the tool's action. This meets the baseline of 4 for tools with no parameters, as it avoids unnecessary details.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('Clear') and the target ('all knowledge from the graph'), making the purpose specific and understandable. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'dump_project_understanding' or 'get_knowledge_statistics' by being a destructive operation rather than a query or retrieval. However, it doesn't explicitly mention the resource type (e.g., 'graph database' or 'knowledge base'), which slightly reduces specificity.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing admin permissions), consequences (e.g., irreversible data loss), or suggest alternatives like 'dump_project_understanding' for backing up data first. Without such context, the agent lacks critical usage instructions.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Related Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/sarathsp06/sourcesage'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server