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 provide destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds context about clearing sensitive data and scenarios for deletion, aligning with annotations. 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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, followed by usage guidelines. Every word serves a purpose 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?
Given low complexity (single parameter, no output schema, annotations present), the description sufficiently covers purpose, context, and usage. No further detail needed.
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 the parameter 'key' clearly described. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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' and resource 'memory by key', clearly stating the function. It also distinguishes from sibling tools by mentioning pairing with 'remember' and 'recall'.
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: when context is stale, task is done, or to clear sensitive data. References alternatives by naming sibling tools, providing clear exclusions and guidance.
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.
The tool set has several overlapping families: ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are explicitly identical right now, the discovery tools (list_datasets, discover_tools, suggest_questions) all serve a 'what can I do here' purpose, and ai_visibility_check is wrapped by scan_competitor_ai_presence. The polymarket_* tools are well-differentiated, but the heavy overlap in the meta-tools makes selection error-prone.
Naming is a mix of conventions with no unifying pattern: family prefixes appear as ask_pipeworx_*, pipeworx_*, and polymarket_*, while unrelated tools use bare nouns (entity_profile, recent_changes), verb-first names (validate_claim, search_within), and inconsistent styles. The three actual FEMA tools (disaster_declarations, list_datasets, query_dataset) share no prefix that ties them to the server's stated name.
34 tools exceeds the 'too many' threshold, and the count is unjustified by the server's apparent scope: only 3 of 34 tools relate to OpenFEMA data, with the remaining 31 being a grab-bag of Pipeworx routing, Polymarket betting, memory, subscription, and AI-visibility utilities. The bulk is either redundant with the meta-routers or off-domain for a server named 'Openfema'.
For FEMA specifically, list_datasets + query_dataset covers generic read-only access and disaster_declarations adds a convenience wrapper, but the domain is extremely thin and lacks FEMA-specific conveniences (e.g., geographic aggregation, multi-dataset joins, incident summaries). For the broader Pipeworx universe the routing coverage is actually decent, but that makes the FEMA-named server's surface feel incoherent — an agent expecting a FEMA toolset finds most of its value in unrelated prediction-market and brand-visibility tools.