Skip to main content
Glama

invinoveritas

by com.babyblueviper

memory_get

Read-only

Retrieve previously stored memory by key. Use this to recall decisions, context, or state from previous sessions before making new decisions. Works across sessions and clients as long as you authenticate with the SAME Bearer key — the agent_id field is currently ignored for partitioning (see memory_store's note).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYesMemory key to retrieve
agent_idYesAccepted but not currently used to partition storage — memory is namespaced by your Bearer key.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds critical behavioral nuance: agent_id is ignored for partitioning, and memory is namespaced by the Bearer key. This exposes a non-obvious gotcha that is essential for correct usage.

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?

The description is three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then usage context, then a vital behavioral note. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy.

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 simple read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, and partitioning behavior. However, it does not specify the return format or behavior when the key is not found, which would be useful since no output schema exists.

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 covers both parameters with 100% description coverage, including the agent_id caveat. The description adds little parameter-specific meaning beyond a general mention of 'by key' and authentication, so it does not exceed the schema's contribution.

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 clearly states the verb 'Retrieve' and the resource 'previously stored memory by key', with explicit purpose of recalling decisions, context, or state. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like memory_store, memory_delete, and memory_search.

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?

The description gives clear context for when to use ('before making new decisions') and notes cross-session/client functionality. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when NOT to use it, such as for searching across multiple memories.

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

All invinoveritas toolsInspect
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

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but there is potential confusion between 'decision' and 'reason', both offering advisory output. Also, 'review', 'witness', 'prove', and 'verify_proof' overlap in the proofs space, though descriptions differentiate them. Overall, an agent can disambiguate with careful reading.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tool names use lowercase and underscores (snake_case), which is consistent. However, the verbs vary: some are imperative (e.g., 'browse', 'execute'), while others are nouns (e.g., 'signals', 'ledger'), breaking a strict verb_noun pattern. Overall, the naming is readable and mostly predictable.

Tool Count2/5

With 30 tools, the surface is too large for a well-scoped server. Many functions could be separated (e.g., memory, workspace, feedback, marketplace). This excess makes it harder for an agent to navigate and select the right tool quickly.

Completeness3/5

The tool set covers core CRUD for memory and workspace, plus feedback, marketplace purchase, bounties, and verification. However, there is no tool to list or search marketplace listings, and workspace creation is only implicit via 'execute'. These gaps hinder fluid workflows.

Resources