Skip to main content
Glama
Nicolas-One

Redis CRUD MCP Server

by Nicolas-One

redis_del

Delete a Redis key by specifying its name. Removes the key and its associated value from the database.

Instructions

删除键。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYes

Implementation Reference

  • src/index.ts:169-169 (registration)
    Tool 'redis_del' is registered in the ListToolsRequestSchema handler with its name, description, and input schema.
    { name: "redis_del", description: "删除键。", inputSchema: { type: "object", properties: { key: { type: "string" } }, required: ["key"] } },
  • Handler for 'redis_del': calls client.del(args.key) and returns a success message with the count of deleted keys.
    redis_del: async () => { const r = await client.del(args.key); return `DEL 成功。删除 ${r} 个键`; },
  • Input schema for redis_del: requires a single 'key' (string) parameter.
    { name: "redis_del", description: "删除键。", inputSchema: { type: "object", properties: { key: { type: "string" } }, required: ["key"] } },
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description fails to disclose behavioral traits like whether deletion is irreversible, what happens if the key does not exist, or any side effects.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is extremely short (three characters plus punctuation), but is under-specified rather than efficiently concise.

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 simple one-param tool, the description lacks behavioral and return value details, making it incomplete for an agent to use confidently.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The schema has 1 parameter (key) with 0% coverage. The description adds no meaning to the parameter beyond the schema, failing to compensate for the lack of parameter description.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description '删除键' clearly states the verb (delete) and resource (key), distinguishing it from sibling tools like redis_get or redis_set. However, it is minimal and does not elaborate on the scope.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to delete a key versus using redis_hdel for hash fields.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Nicolas-One/redis-crud-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server