Skip to main content
Glama

Cortex

by io.github.FilippoPilo
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Save memory

cortex_write

Use this whenever the user tells you to remember, note down, keep or save something, in any language. Use it as well when they state something they will need again later and would not want to repeat: a decision and the reason behind it, a stable fact about them or their work, a preference or a constraint, a conclusion they reached after effort, a correction of something believed before. Then say in one line what you saved, so they can tell you to drop it. The server rejects duplicates by itself: a refused write is not an error, do not rephrase it and try again. Do not save questions, brainstorming, passing remarks or anything the user has not actually stated, and never save passwords, tokens, keys, card numbers or other credentials, even if the user pastes them.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tagsNo
basisNoOrigine dell'informazione: 'observed' se letta direttamente da una fonte (documento, output di uno strumento, dato reale), 'inferred' se e' una deduzione o una stima. Registrata al salvataggio e restituita al richiamo.
titleYesShort title, in the user's language, e.g. "Billing service: chosen database"
claimsNoOpzionale. Fatti atomici gia strutturati, uno per decisione o affermazione: se li passi, il rilevamento dei conflitti li usa direttamente invece di estrarli dal testo. Esempio: {subject: 'Project Vega', predicate: 'adotta', object: 'Redis'}.
contentYesText to remember, in the user's language

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / title / description
      Previous value: -"Short title"New value: +"Short title, in the user's language, e.g. \"Billing service: chosen database\""
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / content / description
      Previous value: -"Testo da ricordare"New value: +"Text to remember, in the user's language"
    • changedInput schema / properties / title / description
      Previous value: -"Titolo breve"New value: +"Short title"
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / claims
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Opzionale. Fatti atomici gia strutturati, uno per decisione o affermazione: se li passi, il rilevamento dei conflitti li usa direttamente invece di estrarli dal testo. Esempio: {subject: 'Project Vega', predicate: 'adotta', object: 'Redis'}.",
+  "items": {
+    "properties": {
+      "claim_text": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "confidence": {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "object": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "predicate": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "subject": {
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "subject",
+      "predicate",
+      "object"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
  4. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / basis
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Origine dell'informazione: 'observed' se letta direttamente da una fonte (documento, output di uno strumento, dato reale), 'inferred' se e' una deduzione o una stima. Registrata al salvataggio e restituita al richiamo.",
+  "enum": [
+    "observed",
+    "inferred"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  5. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the basic annotations, the description discloses that the server rejects duplicates, that a refused write is not an error, that the agent should announce what it saved in one line, and that credentials must never be saved. These are valuable behavioral details not present in the annotations.

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 long but densely packed with actionable guidance. It is front-loaded with the primary trigger, then expands into use cases, response behavior, duplicate handling, and exclusions. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a write tool with no output schema and five parameters, the description provides comprehensive context: when to use it, what to save, what never to save, how to handle refusals, and what to say afterward. The remaining parameter details are already covered by the rich input schema and examples.

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 high (80%), so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful content-selection semantics: it defines what kinds of content qualify, what must be excluded, and that the user's language should be used. This goes beyond the schema's short field descriptions, though it does not elaborate on tags, basis, or claims.

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 trigger: 'Use this whenever the user tells you to remember, note down, keep or save something.' It names the resource (memory) and the action (save), and its scope is clearly distinct from the sibling recall/forget/conflicts tools.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use conditions ('whenever the user tells you to remember...', 'when they state something they will need again later') and explicit when-not-to-use cases ('Do not save questions, brainstorming, passing remarks...'). It also references the complementary drop behavior, helping the agent distinguish this write tool from the forget path.

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

All Cortex toolsInspect
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