Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Redis MCP Server

Redis MCP Server

by Yuchenhui
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

xdel

Delete a specific entry from a Redis stream using the stream key and entry ID. Enables precise removal of stream records.

Instructions

Delete an entry from a Redis stream.

Args: key (str): The stream key. entry_id (str): The ID of the entry to delete.

Returns: str: Confirmation message or an error message.

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": {
      "key": "<key>",
      "entry_id": "<entry_id>"
    },
    "name": "xdel"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYes
entry_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.5

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states 'Delete an entry' and returns confirmation/error, lacking details on idempotency, prerequisites (e.g., stream existence), or 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is concise with a clear front-loaded action. It uses a standard docstring format (Args/Returns) without extra fluff. Could be slightly more streamlined.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the simple tool (2 params, no nesting, output schema exists), the description covers basic functionality but lacks usage hints, error scenarios, or behavioral depth. Adequate but not thorough.

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 0%, but the description adds meaning by naming parameters and their types ('key (str)', 'entry_id (str)'). This partially compensates for the bare schema, though not extensively.

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 an entry from a Redis stream.', using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'delete' (generic key deletion) and 'hdel' (hash field deletion).

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'delete' or 'json_del'. No exclusions or context for selection are given.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools