forgetDelete a previously stored memory by key. Use when context is stale, the task is done, or you want to clear sensitive data the agent saved earlier. Pair with remember and recall.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| key | Yes | Memory key to delete |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "key": "user_research_topic"
+ }
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already signal destructive behavior (destructiveHint: true) and idempotency (idempotentHint: true). The description adds context about clearing sensitive data and deleting by key but does not go beyond what annotations provide. No contradiction.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by usage guidance. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a single-parameter delete tool with annotations covering destructive behavior, the description plus schema is largely complete. It could mention return behavior or failure handling, but the low complexity makes this a minor gap.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with a clear description of the 'key' parameter. The description only repeats that the key identifies the memory, adding no extra syntax or semantics beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('previously stored memory by key'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like remember and recall. It states exactly what the tool does.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly describes when to use: 'Use when context is stale, the task is done, or you want to clear sensitive data the agent saved earlier.' It also references related tools ('Pair with remember and recall'), giving the agent clear usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Several tool groups heavily overlap: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, and discover_tools all route to the same 5,798-tool catalog and compete for the same 'answer this question' use case. The Polymarket tools (bet_research, polymarket_edges, polymarket_arbitrage, polymarket_edge_tracker) also all detect betting opportunities, making it easy to pick the wrong one.
Naming conventions are mixed: verb_noun (ask_pipeworx, compare_entities, validate_claim), noun_noun (entity_profile, polymarket_arbitrage), adjective_noun (recent_changes, deep_research), and get_* for the MHW tools. All names use snake_case, but there is no consistent structural pattern across the set.
35 tools is too many for a coherent server, and the bulk of them (31 tools) are unrelated to the server's apparent 'Mhw' identity, which covers only 4 Monster Hunter World tools. The set reads like three separate servers (MHW game data, Pipeworx research, Polymarket betting) merged into one.
For a server named 'Mhw', the MHW surface is severely incomplete: armor, monsters, skills, and weapons exist, but quests, items, decorations, crafting, and locations are missing. The non-MHW tools are broad but belong to a different domain, so the server does not come close to covering its apparent intended purpose.