MemScope

Change sensitivity

change_sensitivity

Use this when the person wants to change how sensitive a memory is. Raising it narrows who may read it; lowering it widens access and 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>",
      "sensitivity": "<sensitivity>",
      "reason": "<reason>"
    },
    "name": "change_sensitivity"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`agent`	No	Your agent label.
`reason`	Yes	Why, for the audit; ask the person if unsure.
`run_id`	No	Your run id.
`memory_id`	Yes	Memory id ('mem_' prefix optional).
`sensitivity`	Yes	The new sensitivity, lowest to highest: public, internal, restricted, highly_restricted.
`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",
-  "sensitivity"
-]New value: +[
+  "memory_id",
+  "sensitivity",
+  "reason"
+]

First observedNov 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description adds real behavior beyond annotations: direction-dependent effects on readership and the fact that a widening change without confirm_widen returns confirm_required. This is exactly the kind of failure mode the agent needs to anticipate, and it is consistent with the mutation hints (readOnlyHint=false, 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the use condition, then the directional consequence, then the return field. Every sentence carries information and nothing repeats the name or title.

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?

A mutation tool with an output schema and full parameter coverage needs the description only for the direction/confirmation logic, and it delivers that, including a pointer to the visible_to result field. The agent has enough to invoke it correctly and to handle the confirm_required case.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description still adds meaning the schema lacks: the ordering of sensitivity levels is framed as a readership effect, and confirm_widen's role in avoiding confirm_required is explained rather than merely described. The reason and confirm_human parameters are only covered by the schema, not the prose.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('change how sensitive a memory is') and adds directional semantics — raising narrows readership, lowering widens access. It does not name the closest sibling, change_scope, so the boundary between changing sensitivity and changing scope is left for the agent to infer.

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?

'Use this when the person wants to change how sensitive a memory is' gives a clear triggering condition, and the confirm_widen sentence tells the agent the precondition for the widening direction. There are no explicit exclusions or named alternatives, so the agent must guess at change_scope vs this tool.

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?