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.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds context about the data being 'sensitive' and 'previously stored', but does not disclose additional behavioral details such as irreversibility (beyond destructiveHint) or what happens when the key doesn't exist. It provides minimal value beyond annotations.
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 sentences, efficiently front-loaded with the action and resource. The first sentence states the core function; the second provides usage scenarios and complementary tools. No redundant information.
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?
Given the simple single-parameter delete operation, strong annotations, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, and pairing with related tools. It is sufficient for an agent to decide when and how to invoke this tool correctly.
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 description coverage is 100% and the only parameter 'key' is described as 'Memory key to delete'. The description does not add further detail about accepted formats, constraints, or behavior of the key parameter, so it relies on 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 the specific verb 'Delete' with a resource 'previously stored memory by key', and clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools by mentioning pairing with remember and recall. It is immediately clear 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?
It explicitly states when to use: 'when context is stale, the task is done, or you want to clear sensitive data'. It does not provide explicit when-not guidance, but the positive usage contexts are clear. The mention of pairing with remember and recall suggests complementary usage, though not formal alternatives.
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 tools overlap heavily: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, and deep_research all route questions to the same underlying data catalog, and the polymarket_* tools have closely related edge/arbitrage/fill-risk purposes. The descriptions are detailed, but an agent still faces real selection risk between near-duplicate query entry points.
The set is consistently snake_case but otherwise mixes conventions: n8n_ and polymarket_ prefixes, bare verbs like remember/forget/recall, noun phrases like recent_alerts, and brand-style names like ask_pipeworx. It is readable but lacks a unified naming system across the server.
34 tools is a heavy surface, especially for a server named N8n where only 3 tools actually relate to n8n workflow management. Most tools serve Pipeworx data lookup, prediction markets, memory, and subscriptions, making the server feel like several different products merged into one.
The data research, entity resolution, memory, and subscription surfaces are well covered, including useful meta-tools for discovery and grounding. However, the n8n portion is read-only with no create/update/delete/run workflow tools, and one-off utilities like generate_llms_txt and scan_dependency sit isolated, leaving the server's overall domain incomplete.