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 and idempotentHint=true. The description adds context about the nature of deletion and the rationale (clearing sensitive data), which is valuable beyond the 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 concise sentences, no wasted words, purpose is front-loaded. Every sentence earns its place.
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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers purpose, usage, and behavioral context, including reference to sibling tools.
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 description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema's 'Memory key to delete' for the only parameter. Baseline 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 clearly states the verb ('Delete') and the resource ('previously stored memory by key'). It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly mentioning 'remember' and 'recall' as companion tools.
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?
The description provides explicit use cases: when context is stale, task done, or clearing sensitive data. It also pairs with siblings, giving clear guidance on when to use this tool vs 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.
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, with only minor overlap between similar variants (e.g., ask_pipeworx variants) and related prediction market tools (bet_research vs polymarket_edges). Overall, an agent can reliably select the right tool.
Tool names mix verb_noun (e.g., resolve_entity), noun_noun (e.g., entity_profile), and adjective_noun (e.g., recent_changes) patterns, plus a few single verbs. While readable, the lack of a uniform convention adds ambiguity.
33 tools is large but justified by the broad domain coverage. The count is borderline high but still manageable with meta-tools (ask_pipeworx, deep_research) that reduce the effective surface.
The tool set covers a wide range of data sources and tasks, with meta-tools providing deep coverage. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no dedicated Kalshi-only tools, limited attention to non-Polymarket prediction markets), but the overall surface is thorough.