Hipocampo MCP

update_hipocampo

Actualiza un recuerdo existente en el Hipocampo (memoria_vectorial).

Si se proporciona content, el embedding se regenera en BACKGROUND (no
bloquea la llamada, igual que save_hipocampo): la fila conserva su
embedding anterior hasta el backfill y la búsqueda semántica pasa al
nuevo en cuanto esté listo. Los campos no proporcionados no se modifican.

Args:
    id: ID numérico del recuerdo a actualizar.
    content: Nuevo texto del recuerdo (opcional). Si se provee, el embedding
             se regenera en background.
    memory_type: Nuevo tipo de memoria (opcional). Ej: "event", "decision".
    code: Código o etiqueta corta (opcional).
    categories: Nueva lista de categorías (opcional).
    meta_patch: Dict opcional que se FUSIONA sobre metadatos (sobrescribe
                solo las claves incluidas; el resto se conserva). Pensado
                para sincronizar md5/bytes sin escribir SQL a mano.
                Ej: {"md5": "6dbe9bdb...", "bytes": 52790}

Returns:
    Confirmación de la actualización.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`code`	No
`content`	No
`categories`	No
`meta_patch`	No
`memory_type`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 17, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / meta_patch

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Meta Patch"
+}

First observedSep 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses that content embedding is regenerated in BACKGROUND (non-blocking), that the row keeps its previous embedding until backfill and semantic search switches once ready, and that meta_patch is merged rather than replaced. Missing only operational details like permission/auth needs or error behavior.

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?

Front-loads the key behavioral facts (background embedding, partial update) before the Args block, and every sentence and arg line earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

Complete enough for a 6-param mutation tool: it covers partial-update and merge semantics plus background embedding behavior, and an output schema already exists so return values need no elaboration. It stops short of error/permission context but nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate and it does: every parameter is documented with meaning, optionality, and examples ('event', 'decision'; md5/bytes example), plus the crucial merge-vs-overwrite semantics of meta_patch. This adds substantial value beyond the bare schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Actualiza un recuerdo existente en el Hipocampo (memoria_vectorial)'), and explicitly contrasts with the sibling save_hipocampo for the embedding behavior. An agent can distinguish it from save/delete without opening a schema.

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?

Clear context: it is an update of an existing memory, unprovided fields are preserved, and it behaves like save_hipocampo for background embedding regeneration. It names the sibling as a reference point but does not explicitly state when to choose update vs. save or other update-style siblings (set_nivel_hipocampo).

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

All Hipocampo MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Context All Your Agents Can ShareAgents share what they learn, hand off work, and hold it when you switch models. Start with 5 GB free.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?