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 indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. Description adds context about deleting previously stored memories and clearing sensitive data, reinforcing behavioral traits without 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: first sentence states core action, second provides usage guidance. No wasted words.
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?
Simple tool with one required parameter, no output schema, and annotations covering destructiveness. Description fully covers usage context and pairing, making it complete for agent invocation.
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%, and the parameter description 'Memory key to delete' is sufficient. The description does not add new parameter-level details beyond the schema, meeting baseline.
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?
Clearly states 'Delete a previously stored memory by key' providing a specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling tools remember and recall by pairing with them.
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 states when to use: stale context, task done, clear sensitive data. Mentions pairing with remember and recall for context. No explicit when-not-to-use, but positive guidance is strong.
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.
Many tools serve overlapping purposes: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research all provide factual lookups with similar boundaries. NBA-specific tools are mixed with generic Pipeworx utilities, making it hard for an agent to distinguish when to use which.
Tool names mix conventions: snake_case (ai_visibility_check), camelCase (generate_llms_txt), and inconsistent verb usage (ask_pipeworx vs. search_players). No clear pattern emerges across the set.
With 34 tools, the server is overpopulated, especially given its 'Nba' focus. Many tools (e.g., remember, forget, list_subscriptions) are generic utilities unrelated to NBA data, inflating the count beyond a coherent scope.
For an NBA server, tools are severely incomplete: missing player stats, team stats, season standings, and live game details. While the Pipeworx data tools are extensive, they diverge from the server's apparent purpose, leaving clear gaps.