memkin

Remove Person Alias

remove_person_alias

Remove a handle from a person's record to correct misassigned aliases. Provide the handle kind (email, name, slug, etc.) and value to delete.

Instructions

remove_person_alias

Remove a handle from any person.

When to use: correct a wrong alias assignment. Returns: ok.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "kind": "<kind>",
      "value": "<value>"
    },
    "name": "remove_person_alias"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`kind`	Yes	Handle kind.
`value`	Yes	Handle value to remove.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the minimal action. It omits details on permissions, side effects (e.g., if handle doesn't exist), or error conditions.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is very short and direct, with no redundant information. Every sentence serves a purpose, though it could be slightly expanded for clarity.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given no output schema and the tool being a deletion action, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain the meaning of the return value 'ok' or provide prerequisites or error handling.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; it merely restates 'handle' without clarifying formats or constraints.

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 clearly states the verb 'Remove' and the resource 'a handle from any person', distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'link_person_alias' which adds handles.

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 provides a specific use case: 'correct a wrong alias assignment'. However, it lacks guidance on when not to use it or alternatives.

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