MemoryRouter

Consolidate memories (checkout)

consolidate_memories

Use this when the user asks to consolidate, reflect on, or organize their memories, or when memory_status or a search result reports that consolidation is available. Checks out a batch of unconsolidated memories from the connected vault under a 15 minute lease and returns their texts plus server instructions for writing reflection entries. Follow the returned instructions to write the entries, then call commit_reflections with the batch_id. Nothing is modified until commit.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`tier`	No	1 consolidates raw memories into reflections; 2 consolidates reflections into high-level reflections.
`max_tokens`	No	Token budget for the checked-out batch. Defaults to 50000. No connector-side cap.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`tier`	Yes
`count`	Yes
`covers`	No
`message`	No
`batch_id`	Yes
`memories`	No
`est_tokens`	No
`lease_expires_at`	No
`reflection_contract`	No

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Discloses a 15-minute lease, the return of 'texts plus server instructions', the need to follow those instructions, and that 'Nothing is modified until commit'. This is critical side-effect information beyond the generic annotations, which only say readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false.

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 a single paragraph of four sentences, each adding critical information: trigger, action, follow-up instruction, and side-effect note. It is somewhat dense but not wasteful. Front-loaded with the usage trigger, then mechanism, then safety. Slightly long for a description but justified by the complexity.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the existence of an output schema, the description does not need to list return fields. It covers the complete user journey: when to invoke, what the tool does, what to do with the results, and what is not changed. It also acknowledges the memory_status/search context, making it complete for an AI agent selecting this 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?

The input schema already covers both parameters (tier and max_tokens) with complete descriptions (100% schema coverage). The tool description does not add extra meaning about these parameters, but it does mention 'batch_id' in the workflow, which is presumably returned by this tool and used in the follow-up. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses specific verbs and resources: 'Checks out a batch of unconsolidated memories from the connected vault under a 15 minute lease'. This clearly distinguishes the checkout action from the later commit step (commit_reflections) and other sibling tools like delete_memories or search.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly states when to use: 'when the user asks to consolidate, reflect on, or organize their memories, or when memory_status or a search result reports that consolidation is available'. It also gives follow-up guidance: 'call commit_reflections with the batch_id', clearly pointing to an alternative/succeeding tool.

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

All MemoryRouter tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

The tools are mostly distinct, but search and search_memories overlap in purpose, with search being a legacy alias with fewer features. The consolidation workflow tools (consolidate_memories and commit_reflections) are very specific, but their descriptions clearly delineate their roles. Overall, minor overlap exists.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names use a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., commit_reflections, consolidate_memories, date_search_memories). The only minor inconsistency is the pair search and search_memories, where search deviates from the descriptive pattern of its counterpart. Otherwise, naming is clear and predictable.

Tool Count5/5

The server has 10 tools, which is appropriate for a memory management system. Each tool covers a distinct operation (CRUD, search, consolidation, inspection), and the count is neither too few nor too many for the stated purpose of managing and querying a personal memory vault.

Completeness4/5

The tools provide complete CRUD (store, search, retrieve, delete) plus consolidation and inspection workflows. Gaps are minor: there is no explicit tool to list all top-level categories or tags, and update_memory is absent, though consolidation and deletion cover lifecycle needs. The surface is nearly complete.

Resources

Need Help?