Skip to main content
Glama

Gnosem

by dev.gnosem

memory_search

Search the user's memories. Default mode is 'hybrid': blends semantic (cosine over Vectorize) and keyword (BM25 over SQLite FTS5) hits via Reciprocal Rank Fusion (k=60). Semantic catches paraphrases; keyword catches exact-string hits (IDs, dates, code snippets). Pass mode:'semantic' or mode:'keyword' to run just one. Content defaults to the LLM-optimized (compressed) form when available (raw:true to invert). Excludes forgotten + superseded. Optional filters narrow after retrieval: tags (AND), written_by, session_id, and/or since/until (ms epoch).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kNoMax results (1–50). Default 10.
rawNoReturn original prose instead of the compressed form. Default false.
modeNoRetrieval mode. Default 'hybrid'.
tagsNoOnly return memories containing ALL of these tags (AND semantics).
queryYesSearch query. Interpreted as natural language for semantic mode and as FTS5-safe text for keyword mode.
sinceNoOnly return memories created at or after this ms-epoch timestamp.
untilNoOnly return memories created strictly before this ms-epoch timestamp.
session_idNoOnly return memories with an exact session_id match.
written_byNoOnly return memories with an exact written_by match (e.g. 'claude-code').

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully bears the burden. It discloses the hybrid RRF algorithm, exclusion of forgotten/superseded memories, default compression, and filter behavior. This is comprehensive.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single dense paragraph that front-loads the key mode information. It is efficient but slightly packed; breaking into bullet points could improve readability without adding length.

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?

Given 9 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers retrieval behavior, modes, filters, and exclusions thoroughly. It could hint at return format (e.g., list of memory objects) but overall is sufficient.

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%, and the description adds valuable context for many params (e.g., query interpretation per mode, tags AND semantics, filter timing). Some params like k have only default info, but overall enhancement is good.

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 that the tool searches memories, details the default hybrid mode, and contrasts with sibling tools like memory_write and memory_list by focusing on retrieval.

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 explains when to use hybrid vs semantic vs keyword modes, and mentions optional filters. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or direct users to alternatives like memory_list for listing all memories.

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

All Gnosem 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

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: write (single/bulk), search, list, forget, supersede. No overlap or ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent 'memory_' prefix and verb pattern, using snake_case throughout. Naming is predictable and clear.

Tool Count5/5

6 tools is well-scoped for a memory management server, covering essential operations without being excessive or insufficient.

Completeness4/5

Covers write (single/bulk), search, list, soft-delete, and supersede. Minor gap: no direct single-item retrieval by ID, but search can serve that purpose.

Resources