MemScope

Change scope

change_scope

Use this when the person wants to change who can read a memory: the organization, only its author, a team or a project. Narrowing applies at once; widening or a move to a different team or project follows the confirm_widen rule. The result's visible_to says who can read it now.

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>",
      "scope": "<scope>",
      "reason": "<reason>"
    },
    "name": "change_scope"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`team`	No	For scope 'team': id, slug, name or alias of a team the person belongs to.
`agent`	No	Your agent label.
`scope`	Yes	New audience: 'shared' (= 'organization'), 'personal' (= 'private', its author only), 'team' (needs `team`) or 'project' (needs `project`).
`reason`	Yes	Why, for the audit; ask the person if unsure.
`run_id`	No	Your run id.
`project`	No	For scope 'project': id, slug, name or alias of a project the person belongs to.
`memory_id`	Yes	Memory id ('mem_' prefix optional).
`confirm_human`	No	True only if the person approved clearing the flag on a memory you saved.
`confirm_widen`	No	Set true only after the person agreed; a widening change without it gets confirm_required.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedNov 8, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / reason / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "maxLength": 500,
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

removedInput schema / properties / reason / default
```
Removed value: -null
```

changedInput schema / properties / reason / description

Previous value: -"Why, kept in the audit trail. Up to 500 characters."New value: +"Why, for the audit; ask the person if unsure."

addedInput schema / properties / reason / maxLength
```
Added value: +500
```
addedInput schema / properties / reason / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "memory_id",
-  "scope"
-]New value: +[
+  "memory_id",
+  "scope",
+  "reason"
+]

First observedNov 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (which only declare non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent), the description discloses the key asymmetry: narrowing applies immediately while widening requires the confirm_widen acknowledgment and otherwise returns confirm_required. It also points to the `visible_to` field in the result, so the agent knows how to verify the new audience.

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?

Three short sentences: the trigger first, then the immediacy/confirmation rule, then where to confirm the outcome. No restatement of the tool name or schema fields, and every sentence carries information the schema does not.

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 9-parameter mutation with annotations and an output schema, the description covers the decision rule, the confirmation gate, and the result field to check. Minor gaps remain (e.g., what happens on permission failure or how this interacts with sensitivity), but nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

With 100% schema description coverage the baseline is 3, and the description adds real meaning on top: it ties `scope` values to audience concepts and, more importantly, states the exact contract for `confirm_widen` (person must have agreed; omission yields confirm_required). The remaining parameters are left to their already-detailed schema text.

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 gives a concrete verb and resource: changing 'who can read a memory,' with the four audience targets (organization, author only, team, project) spelled out. That effectively separates it from change_sensitivity and other siblings, though no sibling is named explicitly, so it stops just short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It opens with an explicit trigger condition ('Use this when the person wants to change who can read a memory') and explains the confirmation path for widening or moving to a different team or project. There is no explicit 'use X instead' routing to siblings such as change_sensitivity, so it is clear context without full alternative mapping.

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

All MemScope tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?