Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Garden Design MCP Server

Garden Design MCP Server

by zaprojektuj-ogrod
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

clear_all

Clear garden scene contents by scope: remove all objects, zones, and pins, or preserve objects or zones and pins as needed.

Instructions

Clear scene contents. Default scope='all' clears objects, zones, AND pins (matches the tool name's intent). Use scope='zones_pins' to preserve objects, or scope='objects' to preserve zones+pins. NOTE: behaviour change in this MCP version — previously this tool only cleared zones+pins regardless. Returns { success, scope, objectsCleared, zonesCleared, pinsCleared }.

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": "clear_all"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
scopeNoWhat to clear. 'all' (default) = objects + zones + pins. 'zones_pins' = legacy behaviour (zones + pins only). 'objects' = clear plants/buildings/ground shapes only.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.9.3

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the destructive nature, the exact scope of destruction per mode, the version behaviour change, and the return payload fields. It omits whether the clear is reversible or whether the sibling undo/redo tools can restore the cleared content, which matters for a bulk destructive operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the action and the default scope, then the alternatives, then the compatibility note and return shape — a sensible priority order. The parenthetical 'matches the tool name's intent' is meta-commentary that adds little and could be trimmed.

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 single-parameter destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers scope semantics, defaults, migration behaviour, and return fields. The remaining gap is recoverability — nothing tells the agent whether cleared content can be undone.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the enum is already documented, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real meaning on top: it highlights 'all' as the default, ties it to the tool name's intent, and warns that 'zones_pins' is the legacy behaviour — context the schema alone does not convey as prominently.

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 ('Clear scene contents') and immediately enumerates what the default clears (objects, zones, AND pins), so the agent knows exactly what the operation touches. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the per-entity siblings (delete_object, delete_zone, delete_pin, delete_objects), leaving the bulk-vs-targeted choice to inference.

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?

Gives concrete routing guidance for the parameter: default 'all', use 'zones_pins' to preserve objects, use 'objects' to preserve zones+pins. That is clear when-to-use-which-scope guidance. It stops short of saying when to prefer this over the individual delete tools or when clearing is inappropriate.

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