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 include destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the destructive nature is clear. Description adds 'clear sensitive data' context but does not elaborate on idempotency or consequences of deleting non-existent key. Minimal extra value beyond 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 sentences: first states purpose, second gives usage guidelines. No redundancy, efficient and front-loaded.
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 parameter and clear annotations. Description covers purpose and usage. No output schema but delete operations typically don't need detailed return info. Could include error handling details but not essential.
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 description for the single parameter 'key'. Description does not add additional meaning beyond 'Memory key to delete' already in schema. Baseline 3.
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?
Description uses specific verb 'Delete' and resource 'memory by key', clearly stating the action. It distinguishes from siblings 'remember' and 'recall' by specifying deletion.
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, the task is done, or you want to clear sensitive data.' Mentions pairing with related tools. Does not explicitly say when not to use, but guidance is sufficient.
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 have overlapping purposes, such as multiple ask_pipeworx variants and several prediction market tools. This causes ambiguity for agents trying to select the right tool.
Tool names mix verb_noun patterns (ask_pipeworx, forget) with noun phrases (entity_profile) and inconsistent prefixes (pipeworx_, polymarket_). No consistent naming convention.
With 32 tools, the set is excessive for a server named 'Buzzword Density' and includes many redundant or overlapping tools. A more focused set of 10-15 would be more coherent.
The tool set covers a wide range of data sources and operations (retrieval, comparison, monitoring, memory), missing only minor lifecycle operations like updating stored data.