Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
openclaw-control-mcp

openclaw-control-mcp

by smurfy92
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

openclaw_setup_clear

Clear persisted gateway configuration for all or a specific instance. Resets to environment variables or setup prompt, preserving device identity and tokens.

Instructions

Clear a persisted gateway config. By default clears every instance; pass instance to clear just one. Does NOT touch the device identity or device tokens. After this, the MCP falls back to env vars or errors with 'configure first'.

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": "openclaw_setup_clear"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
instanceNoIf set, clear only this named instance. Omit to clear all instances.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.7.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Discloses that it does not touch device identity or tokens, and the post-operation behavior. No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden, and it does so adequately, though it could mention authorization requirements.

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words. Action, key parameter behavior, and critical caveats are all front-loaded and efficiently communicated.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: what the tool does, scope, parameter usage, exclusions, and post-condition. It is entirely sufficient for an AI agent to invoke correctly.

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% and the parameter description in schema already explains the instance parameter fully. The tool description repeats this information without adding new semantic details beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states it clears a persisted gateway config, with default clearing all instances and optional instance parameter for targeted clearing. The scope is well-defined, excluding device identity and tokens, distinguishing it from device-related tools.

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?

Provides clear context on when to use (to clear config) and what happens after (fallback to env vars or error). Does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but the action is unambiguous.

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