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 use cases like clearing sensitive data, which goes beyond annotations. However, it does not discuss behavior for non-existent keys or confirm idempotency, though this is minor given the annotation coverage.
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 filler. The first states the action, the second provides usage scenarios and context. Every sentence adds value.
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?
The tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema. The description covers purpose, usage, and pairing. A minor gap is the lack of error handling mention (e.g., if key doesn't exist), but idempotency hint implies safe multiple calls.
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%, so the one parameter 'key' is fully described in the schema as 'Memory key to delete.' The description adds no additional information about the parameter beyond the schema, meeting the 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?
The description clearly states 'Delete a previously stored memory by key,' using a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools 'remember' and 'recall' by mentioning pairing, establishing it as the inverse operation.
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 when-to-use guidance: 'Use when context is stale, the task is done, or you want to clear sensitive data.' It mentions pairing with 'remember' and 'recall' but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use it.
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.
Multiple tools have overlapping purposes: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, and deep_research all serve similar question-answering roles. The soil-specific tools are distinct but mixed with many general tools, causing confusion.
Naming conventions are inconsistent: some tools use snake_case (ask_pipeworx, list_soil_properties), others are compound nouns (suggest_questions, deep_research), and there is no uniform pattern like verb_noun across the set.
With 34 tools, the count is high but might be justified for a broad platform. However, the server name 'Soilgrids' suggests a focused soil data service, making the count feel excessive and unfocused.
For soil data, the three dedicated tools (list_soil_properties, soil_classification, soil_properties) cover basic needs but lack advanced queries. The general tools are extensive but introduce many gaps unrelated to soil, so overall completeness for the server's stated purpose is mediocre.