Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

OnlyMCP

by com.only-mcp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Search memory

memory_search
Read-only

Full-text search across memory, skills and agents. A plain word matches as a prefix (kal finds kaleidoscope), a file whose path or name contains the query is a hit and comes first, and a name with a small typo is found where the database allows it. Quotes and -word switch to exact search. Returns the best matches with a short snippet of each.

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "memory_search"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoHow many hits at most, 1 to 50. Default 20.
queryYesWhat to look for. Plain words match as prefixes; quotes and -word switch to exact search.
typesNoComma-separated subset of memory, skill, agent. Default: all three.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / query / description
      Previous value: -"What to look for. Plain words; quotes and -word work."New value: +"What to look for. Plain words match as prefixes; quotes and -word switch to exact search."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses substantial behavior: prefix matching with a concrete example ('kal finds kaleidoscope'), path/name hits ranked first, typo tolerance where supported, quote/-word exact mode, and that results include short snippets. That is exactly the kind of matching and ranking context an agent needs.

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?

Two dense sentences, front-loaded with scope and followed by matching rules and return format. Every clause carries information; no padding.

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 read-only search tool with no output schema, the description covers scope, matching semantics, ranking, exact-mode switches and the shape of results (best matches with snippets). Only minor gaps remain around result ordering details or handling of ambiguous queries, but nothing essential to calling it 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 coverage is 100%, so query, limit and types are already documented. The description reinforces query semantics (prefix matching, quote/-word exact search) and adds a concrete prefix example, but it does not elaborate on limit or types beyond what the schema states. 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Full-text search across memory, skills and agents.' It clearly distinguishes itself from enumeration siblings like list_memory, list_skills and list_agents, and from targeted readers like memory_read or get_skill.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description establishes the search use case but never explicitly says when to prefer this over list_memory, memory_tree or get_skill. The guidance is implied by the scope ('search' vs 'list') rather than stated, so an agent must infer routing.

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

All OnlyMCP toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources