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 declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description's 'Delete' is consistent but adds little beyond what annotations already provide.
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?
Three concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose and usage. No superfluous 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?
Simple tool with 1 required parameter, no output schema. Description sufficiently covers purpose, usage, and effect for agent decision-making.
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% for the single parameter 'key'. Description repeats 'Memory key to delete' which matches schema; no additional semantics added.
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 specific action 'Delete a previously stored memory by key', distinguishing it from siblings like 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: stale context, task done, or clearing sensitive data. Mentions pairing with remember and recall, but no explicit when-not-to-use.
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.
Three ask_pipeworx variants and a dense cluster of polymarket_* edge tools have heavily overlapping purposes, and ai_visibility_check vs scan_competitor_ai_presence further blurs boundaries. Only the sam_*, memory, and subscription tools form cleanly distinct families.
All names are lowercase snake_case and readable, but the pattern is mixed: verb_noun names (compare_entities, resolve_entity), bare verbs (remember, recall, forget), noun phrases (entity_profile, polymarket_edges), and domain-prefix families (sam_*, polymarket_*) coexist. No camelCase chaos, but no consistent verb style either.
36 tools is well beyond the ideal range, and many are near-duplicates or wrappers (ask_pipeworx variants, ai_visibility_check vs scan_competitor_ai_presence). The server is named Samgov, yet only 5 tools actually concern SAM.gov, making the count feel inflated and unfocused.
The SAM.gov subset covers entity search, opportunities, set-asides, opportunity details, and exclusions, but omits major datasets like contract awards. The broader Pipeworx research/memory/subscription surface is extensive, though it is muddled by redundant query modes and lacks a direct way to invoke individual pack tools.