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 |
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 clearing sensitive data and memories stored by the agent, but does not go beyond these annotations with new behavioral details like irreversibility or permission requirements.
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 the core action. Each sentence earns its place: action, usage scenarios, and tool relationships. No redundant wording.
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 one-parameter, no-output-schema tool with rich annotations, the description fully covers what, when, and relationship to siblings. No gaps in understanding how to invoke or what to expect.
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 description coverage is 100% with 'Memory key to delete.' The description only repeats 'by key' without adding extra meaning about the key's format, uniqueness, or behavior. 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 starts with a specific verb+resource: 'Delete a previously stored memory by key.' It clearly distinguishes from siblings like remember and recall by directly stating the deletion action.
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.' Also mentions pairing with remember and recall, giving clear context for usage.
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.
Several tools have overlapping purposes, such as ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, and deep_research. While each has distinct nuances, they could be confused by an agent.
Most tools use snake_case, but the naming pattern is inconsistent (e.g., bet_research vs. polymarket_arbitrage vs. ai_visibility_check). There is no strong verb_noun pattern across the set.
34 tools is high given the server's stated purpose ('spacenews'). Only a few tools directly relate to space news; the bulk are general-purpose Pipeworx utilities, making the scope too broad.
For a space news server, the tool surface is incomplete: only get_articles, get_blogs, and search_articles are relevant. Missing tools for article details, source filtering, or categories. The extensive general tools don't make up for this gap.