Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Mnemoverse Memory

by io.github.mnemoverse
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

memory_feedback

Rate memories returned by memory_read to help improve future retrieval ranking. Pass their IDs as memory_ids and an outcome from -1 (unhelpful) to 1 (helpful). Records feedback and updates ranking signals: positive feedback raises a memory's ranking; negative feedback lowers it so other memories out-rank it — nothing is erased. Saved text is not changed or deleted. For memories read from a shared room, pass that room's address as domain; your own memories need no domain. A read-only room member cannot rate the room's memories.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainNoOnly for memories read from a shared room: that room's address (xroom:...), exactly as you read it. Omit it for your own memories, which are rated by id alone.
outcomeYesHow helpful was this? 1.0 = very helpful, 0 = neutral, -1.0 = harmful/wrong
memory_idsYesIDs of the memories to rate, the `id:` line of each memory_read result.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
avg_valenceNoAverage valence of the rated memories after the update. Reported as 0 in an asynchronous acknowledgement, where the real value is computed later — a 0 here is therefore not evidence of a neutral outcome.
updated_countYesHow many memories the service reports it applied the rating to. Processed synchronously this is the real count of memories that existed and were updated; processed asynchronously it is a best-effort ACCEPTED-count estimate — the number of IDs submitted — and the authoritative number is not known until the background worker runs. Zero means no submitted ID matched in the service's resolved request scope.
coactivation_edgesNoNumber of links between query concepts and result concepts that this rating changed. This connector does not send query_concepts, so live calls through this tool report 0; asynchronous acknowledgements also report 0.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • removedOutput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / coactivation_edges / description
      Previous value: -"Number of feedback-driven query/result concept co-activation edges changed by the service. This is separate from ordinary Hebbian strengthening among a memory's own concepts. This connector does not send query_concepts, so live calls through this tool report 0; asynchronous acknowledgements also report 0."New value: +"Number of links between query concepts and result concepts that this rating changed. This connector does not send query_concepts, so live calls through this tool report 0; asynchronous acknowledgements also report 0."
  3. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / atom_ids
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Deprecated since 0.11, removed in 0.13: atom_ids is the old name of memory_ids, still accepted on its own until then. Pass memory_ids instead.",
-  "items": {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "minItems": 1,
-  "type": "array"
-}
    • changedInput schema / properties / memory_ids / description
      Previous value: -"Required: IDs of the memories to rate, the `id:` line of each memory_read result. (Optional in this schema only while the deprecated atom_ids is still accepted in its place.)"New value: +"IDs of the memories to rate, the `id:` line of each memory_read result."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "outcome"
-]New value: +[
+  "memory_ids",
+  "outcome"
+]
  4. Changed9 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / atom_ids
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Deprecated since 0.11, removed in 0.13: atom_ids is the old name of memory_ids, still accepted on its own until then. Pass memory_ids instead.",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "minItems": 1,
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / domain
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Only for memories read from a shared room: that room's address (xroom:...), exactly as you read it. Omit it for your own memories, which are rated by id alone.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / memory_ids / description
      Previous value: -"Personal-scope memory IDs from a prior memory_read. Shared-room IDs cannot currently be rated because this tool has no domain input."New value: +"Required: IDs of the memories to rate, the `id:` line of each memory_read result. (Optional in this schema only while the deprecated atom_ids is still accepted in its place.)"
    • removedInput schema / properties / memory_ids / items / format
      Removed value: -"uuid"
    • removedInput schema / properties / memory_ids / items / pattern
      Removed value: -"^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12})$"
    • removedInput schema / properties / memory_ids / maxItems
      Removed value: -20
    • changedInput schema / properties / outcome / description
      Previous value: -"Outcome signal: -1.0 (failure) to +1.0 (success)."New value: +"How helpful was this? 1.0 = very helpful, 0 = neutral, -1.0 = harmful/wrong"
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "memory_ids",
-  "outcome"
-]New value: +[
+  "outcome"
+]
  5. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description discloses the actual effect: positive feedback raises ranking, negative lowers it so others out-rank it, and nothing is erased or edited. It also surfaces a permission constraint (read-only room members cannot rate) that the annotations do not express.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and its purpose, then progressively narrower details (outcome scale, ranking effect, domain rule, permission caveat). Dense but slightly redundant: 'nothing is erased' and 'Saved text is not changed or deleted' say nearly the same thing.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values need not be described. For a 3-parameter mutation with annotations covering the safety profile, the description supplies everything an agent needs: the source of IDs, the scale, the shared-room rule, and the ranking consequence.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters and the -1..1 range. The description still adds cross-tool meaning by identifying memory_ids as the `id:` line of a memory_read result and by explaining the conditional domain requirement for shared rooms.

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 ('Rate memories returned by memory_read') and immediately names the effect on retrieval ranking. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like memory_read (which returns memories) and memory_write (which creates text), because rating is an explicit separate action.

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?

Explicitly ties usage to memories obtained from memory_read, states how to pass IDs and outcome, tells the agent to include the room address only for shared-room memories, and names an exclusion (read-only room members cannot rate). When-to-use, when-not-to-use, and the alternative path are all covered.

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

All Mnemoverse Memory 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