Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ragflow-kb-mcp

ragflow-kb-mcp

by feci
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

ragflow_delete_memory

Destructive

Permanently deletes a specified memory and all associated messages in a RAGFlow knowledge base using the memory ID.

Instructions

Permanently delete a memory and all of its messages.

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": {
      "memory_id": "<memory_id>"
    },
    "name": "ragflow_delete_memory"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
memory_idYesMemory ID

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.1

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds genuinely new behavioral information: the deletion is permanent and it cascades to all of the memory's messages. That cascade disclosure is exactly the kind of blast-radius context annotations cannot convey.

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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with zero filler, and the permanence and cascade facts are stated immediately. The brevity borders on under-specification, but every word present earns its place.

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?

For a one-parameter destructive tool with full annotation coverage and an output schema, the description supplies the key facts an agent needs to call it safely. The only meaningful gap is that it does not help the agent choose between this tool and the softer message-level forget tool.

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?

There is only one parameter, and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already tells the agent what memory_id is. The description adds no format hints, no source for the ID, and no behavior around an invalid ID; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 names a specific verb (delete) and resource (a memory) and explicitly scopes the blast radius to all of its messages. It does not, however, distinguish itself from nearby siblings like ragflow_forget_memory_message, so an agent still has to infer which removal tool to pick.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives such as ragflow_forget_memory_message or ragflow_set_memory_message_status, and no prerequisites. The word 'Permanently' implies finality but does not route the agent between destructive memory operations.

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