server-memory

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

delete_entities

Remove entities and their associated relations from agent memory. Soft delete by default; set hard=true for permanent removal.

Instructions

Delete entities (soft delete by default, cascades to relations).

Set hard=true for permanent deletion.

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": {
      "entityNames": "<entityNames>"
    },
    "name": "delete_entities"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`entityNames`	Yes
`hard`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jun 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses soft delete default, cascading, and hard delete option, but lacks details on reversibility, required permissions, or side effects beyond cascading. Some transparency but not comprehensive.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and contains no redundant words. Every word adds value.

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 the absence of annotations and the complexity of a delete tool with cascading, the description lacks details on error cases, return values (despite output schema existence), and specific side effects on related data. It feels incomplete for safe usage.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage. The description clarifies the 'hard' parameter's function (soft default, hard permanent) but does not add meaning to 'entityNames' beyond the parameter name, leaving ambiguity about format or constraints. Partial compensation.

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 'Delete entities' with a specific verb and resource, and adds detail about soft delete default and cascading to relations, distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_entities and merge_entities.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description provides guidance on using the 'hard' parameter for permanent deletion, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over others or when not to use it, nor does it mention prerequisites or consequences of cascading.

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