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 indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, which the description aligns with by saying 'Delete'. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the annotations, such as the security nuance of clearing sensitive data, but overall does not significantly extend the behavioral profile.
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: the first states the purpose, the second provides usage guidance. Every sentence is necessary and adds value, with no extraneous content.
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 the tool's simplicity (single parameter, no output schema, clear annotations), the description is complete. It covers purpose, usage context, and relationships to sibling tools, leaving no significant gaps for an agent to act.
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?
The description does not add meaning beyond the input schema: the schema already defines 'key' as 'Memory key to delete' with 100% coverage. The description merely references 'by key', offering no additional syntax, format, or constraints.
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.' It uses a specific verb ('delete'), identifies the resource (memory), and distinguishes from sibling tools 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?
Explicit when-to-use scenarios are given: 'when context is stale, the task is done, or you want to clear sensitive data.' It also mentions pairing with 'remember' and 'recall'. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the positive guidance is clear.
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 ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_grounded, and deep_research all answering questions, and bet_research overlapping with polymarket_edges/arbitrage. The diverse tool set lacks clear boundaries.
All names use snake_case, but verb patterns are inconsistent: some start with verbs (ask_pipeworx, remember) while others start with nouns (polymarket_arbitrage, entity_profile). Names vary widely in length and descriptiveness.
33 tools is excessive for a server named 'Omdb', which implies a movie database. Most tools are unrelated to movies, indicating poor scoping for the server's purpose.
For the OMDb domain, only search and retrieval tools exist, with no create/update/delete operations. Overall, the tool set feels like a random collection with significant gaps relative to any coherent domain.