Pathrule

Pathrule Delete Memory

pathrule_delete_memory

Destructive

Soft-delete a memory by default. Pass hard:true to permanently delete (requires workspace_admin). Cloud-only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`hard`	No	False or omitted performs a soft delete. True permanently deletes and requires admin rights.
`memory_id`	Yes	Memory UUID to delete.
`workspace_id`	Yes	Workspace UUID from pathrule_list_workspaces.
`expected_version_id`	No	Optional optimistic-concurrency token from the existing record. Pass it when available to avoid overwriting a newer edit.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes	true when the call succeeded. false when it did not, in which case `error` carries the reason and the success fields are absent.
`data`	No	Deleted memory: id, plus the title it had before deletion.
`error`	No	Present only when ok is false.
`human_message`	No	One-line summary of the result, safe to relay to the user verbatim.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 5, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "description": "Deleted memory: id, plus the title it had before deletion."
+    },
+    "error": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "description": "Present only when ok is false.",
+      "properties": {
+        "code": {
+          "description": "Stable machine-readable failure code, for example insufficient_scope, workspace_id_required, rate_limited, not_found, or upstream_error. Branch on this, not on message text.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "detail": {
+          "description": "Optional structured context for the failure, for example { missing_scopes: [...] } on insufficient_scope."
+        },
+        "message": {
+          "description": "Human-readable explanation of the failure.",
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "code",
+        "message"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "human_message": {
+      "description": "One-line summary of the result, safe to relay to the user verbatim.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "description": "true when the call succeeded. false when it did not, in which case `error` carries the reason and the success fields are absent.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "ok"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedMay 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description adds meaningful behavioral nuance beyond the destructiveHint annotation: the default action is soft-delete, hard:true causes permanent deletion, admin rights are required for that path, and the tool is cloud-only. This is exactly the operational context annotations alone do not provide.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences with the default behavior front-loaded and the exceptional path and constraints following. Every clause earns its place with no filler or repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given 100% schema coverage, an output schema, and the destructiveHint annotation, the description covers the decision-relevant behavior: default mode, permanent mode, admin requirement, and cloud-only restriction. It could mention whether soft-deleted memories remain restorable, but that is not necessary for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the schema already documents all four parameters including the hard vs soft delete difference and expected_version_id's optimistic concurrency purpose. The description's mention of hard:true adds minimal value beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the specific verb 'delete' and resource 'memory' explicitly, and clarifies the two deletion modes (soft by default, permanent with hard:true). This makes it distinct from sibling delete tools for rules/skills and from memory read/write/update tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It clearly states when to use the default soft delete versus passing hard:true, and flags the workspace_admin requirement and Cloud-only limitation. It does not explicitly name alternative tools like update_memory or write_memory, but the context for choosing the delete operation is clear.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Pathrule tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Tools are grouped by resource (memory/rule/skill/workspace/snapshot/refresh) and mostly have distinct output shapes, so agents can usually pick the right one. A few retrieval tools (get_context, get_node, get_tree, goto) overlap in purpose, but their descriptions clarify resolution mode vs full tree vs context bundle.

Naming Consistency3/5

All tools share the pathrule_ prefix and mostly follow verb_noun, but the verbs are inconsistent: create_workspace vs write_memory, get_node vs read_memory, delete_skill vs remove_pattern, plus verb-only exceptions like goto, setup, and ping. The pattern is readable but not uniform.

Tool Count2/5

32 tools is above the 25-tool threshold and feels heavy for a single server, even with a broad domain. Several context-retrieval tools and read/list variants could potentially be consolidated, though each tool does have a specific purpose.

Completeness4/5

Core CRUD is covered for memories, rules, and skills, along with workspaces, snapshots, refresh tasks, and pattern import/removal. Minor gaps include no standalone list_rules/list_skills and no snapshot update/delete, but agents can work around these via get_context, goto, and get_tree.

Resources

Need Help?