Memory MCP

forget

Permanently delete a stored memory by ID to remove outdated or incorrect project context from persistent AI memory.

Instructions

Permanently delete a memory by id.

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": "forget"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`tool`	No		unknown
`memory_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 31, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. 'Permanently delete' usefully communicates irreversibility, which is exactly the trait an agent most needs before a destructive call, but it says nothing about confirmation requirements, whether the memory must exist, or what happens on an invalid id.

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?

A single eight-word sentence, front-loaded with the operation and its permanence qualifier. Nothing wasted and nothing buried.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description covers the core action. But for a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage and an unexplained second parameter, the definition does not give quite enough to call it safely and correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for both parameters. 'By id' gives meaning to memory_id, but the second parameter 'tool' (default 'unknown') is completely undocumented in both schema and description, leaving the agent to guess at its purpose.

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 verb 'delete' plus the resource 'memory' with the qualifier 'permanently' and 'by id' makes the operation unmistakable, which matters because the tool name 'forget' is metaphorical rather than literal. It stops short of naming a sibling such as update_memory or remember to draw the boundary, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

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 explicit guidance on when to pick this over update_memory (soft edit) or when not to call it. The single word 'Permanently' is the only hint that this path is irreversible, and it is not framed as a caution or a decision rule.

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

Deploy Server