Gnosis Memory

task_feed

Read-only

Recently-changed tasks, chronological (not ranked). For "what needs attention?" / "what changed?". Find tasks by content -> memory_search.

Each: preview, progress [done,total], status, topics, collection. Default 32, max 500. Fan-out: no collection -> personal + all your collections. Filters: status (active/blocked/review/...), topic, collection.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "task_feed"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Max tasks to return. Default 32, max 500.
`since`	No	ISO timestamp, or 24h / 2d / yesterday. Returns tasks updated after it.
`topic`	No	Filter to one topic.
`status`	No	Omit for every task not done; done lists finished ones.
`collection`	No	Scope to one collection. Omit=personal + all collections.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint=false; the description adds the substantive behavior: chronological rather than ranked ordering, fan-out semantics (no collection means personal plus all your collections), default 32 / max 500 sizing, and the per-task fields returned. Those are exactly the traits an agent needs before deciding to call and while interpreting results.

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?

Telegraphic but front-loaded: purpose first, then the alternative, then return shape, then defaults, then fan-out, then filters. Nearly every fragment carries distinct information; the only mild redundancy is repeating the collection default already in the schema.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by enumerating returned fields (preview, progress [done,total], status, topics, collection). With five optional parameters, fan-out, ordering, and sizing all covered, nothing an agent needs to call or interpret this tool correctly is missing.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so every parameter including the status enum is already documented in structured form. The description restates the filter set (status/topic/collection) and the collection fan-out, but both points are already in the schema text, so it adds little meaning beyond it. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the load.

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?

Opens with a specific resource and scope: 'Recently-changed tasks, chronological (not ranked)', which tells the agent both what is returned and the ordering guarantee. It explicitly differentiates from the sibling memory_search for content-based lookup, so an agent can pick between them without opening either schema.

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?

Gives concrete triggering intents ('what needs attention?' / 'what changed?') and names the alternative with its selection condition ('Find tasks by content -> memory_search'). This is explicit when-to-use plus routing, not implied usage.

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

All Gnosis Memory 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?