Skip to main content
Glama

emem, the verifiable memory protocol for the physical world

by io.github.Vortx-AI
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Scan for multi-attester disagreement

emem_memory_contradictions
Read-onlyIdempotent

Surface where the corpus DISAGREES with itself (algebra: competing evidence). When two or more independent sources signed different values for the same place + band + time, this returns that disagreement with a 0–1 severity score and citations to every disputed fact, instead of silently picking one value and hiding the conflict. The opposite of a confident single answer: it tells you when not to trust one. Read the SCOPE before quoting a zero: by default this asks only whether two DISTINCT attesters disagree, so one responder answering an address from two different upstreams is not counted until you pass include_same_attester_sources: true.

When to use: Call before you rely on a number: 'is there disagreement about X', 'do the sources corroborate this', 'audit this claim'. Narrow with cell_prefix for a region and band for one family; min_severity drops trivial differences. Severity is per band kind: scalar = spread over the band's range, vector = 1 - mean cosine, categorical = 1 - mode share. On a single-responder deployment add include_same_attester_sources: true, because the likeliest real disagreement there is one signer answering from two providers and the default scope cannot report it. Each record names its disagreement_scope. The receipt cites every disputed cid; quantify a pair with emem_diff, or read the disagrees_with edge via emem_edges_recall.

Example arguments: {"cell_prefix":"damO","band":"indices.ndvi","min_severity":0.2}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bandNoBand key filter (e.g. `indices.ndvi`). Omit to include all bands.
cellNoAlias for `cell_prefix`, and the spelling the rest of the surface uses for a cell64. Send a cell64 you already hold and the scan narrows to that place instead of running over the corpus.
limitNoMax contradictions to return.
cell64NoAlias for `cell_prefix`.
cell_prefixNoA cell64 to scan, or a bytewise prefix of one (e.g. `defi.zb5f9`). Omit to scan the whole corpus up to the scan cap. A full cell64 is a prefix of itself, so passing one narrows the scan to exactly that place.
min_severityNoSeverity floor in [0, 1]. 0 = report every disagreement, 1 = only flagrant. Severity scoring is per band kind: scalar (max-min over band range), vector (1 - mean cosine), categorical (1 - mode share).
window_unix_sNo[lo, hi] inclusive Unix-seconds filter on attestations' signed_at, all disagreeing attestations must fall in the window.
include_same_attester_sourcesNoAlso report keys where ONE attester answered the same address from two different upstreams. Default false, which scans only for disagreement between two or more DISTINCT attesters — so on a single-responder corpus a zero here means the narrower question was answered, not that nothing disagrees. Set true and a key qualifies when the facts differ in `derivation.fn_key` or in their `sources[].scheme` set; the same provider re-signed is a refresh, not a disagreement, and stays excluded. Each record carries `disagreement_scope` and a `providers[]` list naming what changed.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / cell / description
      Previous value: -"Alias for `cell_prefix`, and the name the other six tools that take a cell64 use. Send a cell64 you already hold and the scan narrows to that place instead of running over the corpus."New value: +"Alias for `cell_prefix`, and the spelling the rest of the surface uses for a cell64. Send a cell64 you already hold and the scan narrows to that place instead of running over the corpus."
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / cell
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias for `cell_prefix`, and the name the other six tools that take a cell64 use. Send a cell64 you already hold and the scan narrows to that place instead of running over the corpus.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / cell64
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias for `cell_prefix`.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / cell_prefix / description
      Previous value: -"Bytewise prefix on cell64 (e.g. `defi.zb5f9`). Omit to scan the whole corpus up to the scan cap."New value: +"A cell64 to scan, or a bytewise prefix of one (e.g. `defi.zb5f9`). Omit to scan the whole corpus up to the scan cap. A full cell64 is a prefix of itself, so passing one narrows the scan to exactly that place."
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / include_same_attester_sources
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Also report keys where ONE attester answered the same address from two different upstreams. Default false, which scans only for disagreement between two or more DISTINCT attesters — so on a single-responder corpus a zero here means the narrower question was answered, not that nothing disagrees. Set true and a key qualifies when the facts differ in `derivation.fn_key` or in their `sources[].scheme` set; the same provider re-signed is a refresh, not a disagreement, and stays excluded. Each record carries `disagreement_scope` and a `providers[]` list naming what changed.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  4. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / window_unix_s / description
      Previous value: -"[lo, hi] inclusive Unix-seconds filter on attestations' signed_at — all disagreeing attestations must fall in the window."New value: +"[lo, hi] inclusive Unix-seconds filter on attestations' signed_at, all disagreeing attestations must fall in the window."
  5. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent behavior, so credit goes beyond that use: the description adds the important default-scope caveat ('by default only two DISTINCT attesters'), the meaning of a zero result, severity formulas per band kind, and the existence of disagreement_scope/citations in results. This is valuable context beyond the annotation fields.

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 text is front-loaded with the core purpose, organized into a function—definition block and a 'When to use' block, and ends with a concrete example. It is long but each section carries meaningful instructions; no real filler, though some schema repetition exists.

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?

With no output schema, the description explains what records return (severity, citations, disagreement_scope), specifies severity formula variations, and it refers to what is not covered by a zero. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to know when to call and what to expect.

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 most parameters already have long descriptions. The description adds usable context such as 'Narrow with cell_prefix and band' and the single-responder purpose of include_same_attester_sources, plus an example, so it does exceed the schema alone, even if some details are repeated.

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 this tool surfaces corpus self-disagreement with severity scores and citations for competing values, and explicitly contrasts itself with a 'confident single answer' so it is distinguishable from sibling query tools like emem_ask or emem_recall.

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?

It has an explicit 'When to use' paragraph with example questions and gives concrete guidance on narrowing with cell_prefix/band and on the include_same_attester_sources flag for single-responder deployments. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool for the opposite single-answer case, though it implies it via 'the opposite of a confident single answer'.

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

All emem, the verifiable memory protocol for the physical world 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