kb_remove_document
Remove um ou mais documentos da base (apaga o original, os chunks e o índice). Aceita uma lista de ids.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| account | No | ||
| document_ids | Yes |
Base de Conhecimento
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
B3.1/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description states the tool deletes original, chunks, and index, which is destructive, but the annotations declare destructiveHint: false. This directly contradicts the description's claim, so transparency collapses.
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?
Two short sentences convey the action and input format without redundancy. Efficient and front-loaded.
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?
No output schema exists, so the description should explain return behavior or side effects. It mentions deletions but not response types, irreversibility, or error cases. Combined with the annotation contradiction, it's incomplete for a destructive operation.
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?
The description explains document_ids as a list of ids, but the account parameter is completely unspecified. With 0% schema coverage, the description should clarify both parameters but only partially addresses one.
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 clearly identifies the action ('Remove...documentos da base') and the resource, and specifies what gets deleted (original, chunks, index). It distinguishes from sibling tools like kb_add_text and kb_get_document by focusing on removal.
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?
The description implies use when documents need to be removed, but provides no explicit exclusions, prerequisites, or guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives (though no direct alternative exists). It is adequate but minimal.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5
Most tools are distinct: kb_* tools handle knowledge base operations, while authenticate/connect/marketplace/toolkit_info serve system-level purposes. However, 'connect' and 'toolkit_info' overlap slightly in reporting connection status, and 'marketplace' is a broad multi-purpose tool that might be confused with 'report_bug' for feedback.
Naming Consistency3/5
The kb_* tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (kb_add_text, kb_get_document, kb_ingest_url, etc.), but system tools break the pattern: 'authenticate', 'connect', 'marketplace', 'report_bug', 'show_version', 'toolkit_info' use varying conventions (bare verbs, nouns, compound names). The mixed style reduces overall consistency.
Tool Count5/5
With 13 tools, the server covers both the knowledge base domain (9 kb_* tools) and platform management (4 system tools). This is a well-scoped count that doesn't feel bloated, and each tool addresses a distinct operational need.
Completeness4/5
The kb_* tools cover the core lifecycle: add text, ingest URLs, get/list documents, search, remove. Missing obvious operations like 'update document' or 'create a new empty document' are minor gaps easily worked around. The marketplace tool adds extensibility that mitigates domain gaps, but within the stated purpose the coverage is strong.