Skip to main content
Glama

TeamShared

by io.github.xhad
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

memory_profile_get

Return a token-capped bootstrap profile for this caller.

Compact markdown (soul when the key is account-linked, a few high-signal durable facts preferring kind=preference, and a short recent episodic tail). Empty/minimal when the org has nothing to inject. Also returned on memory_session_ensure as profile and prepended on agent_run_start when non-empty. Does not dump full recall or the skills catalog. namespace= excludes facts/episodes outside that container.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
namespaceNoWhen set, profile facts/episodes are limited to this org-allowlisted container (exclude other namespaces). Omit for the shared-org digest. Invalid/unknown slugs fail.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / namespace
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "When set, profile facts/episodes are limited to this org-allowlisted container (exclude other namespaces). Omit for the shared-org digest. Invalid/unknown slugs fail."
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It thoroughly explains the output format (compact markdown, soul, preference facts, episodic tail), conditions for empty/minimal results, its appearance in other calls, and its exclusion of full recall/skills. It also discloses namespace filtering behavior. This is exemplary transparency.

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 front-loaded with the primary purpose, then delivers compact, high-value details about content, edge cases, and cross-tool behavior. Every sentence contributes, and the prose is dense without being verbose. Structure and length are optimal for an agent.

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?

Given the output schema exists (signal indicates yes), the description need not explain return structures. It covers what the profile contains, when it may be empty, how it relates to other calls, and the parameter's effect. No critical information for correct invocation is missing.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The schema already provides 100% coverage for the single 'namespace' parameter, including its meaning and failure behavior. The description adds a redundant phrase ('namespace= excludes...') but no new information beyond the schema. Per the baseline rule, when schema coverage is high, a 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific action ('Return a token-capped bootstrap profile') with a clear resource (the caller's memory profile). It also differentiates itself from siblings by explicitly noting it 'Does not dump full recall or the skills catalog', which distinguishes it from memory_recall and memory_tools_catalog. The purpose is unambiguous and actionable.

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 provides context on when the tool is used ('Also returned on memory_session_ensure... prepended on agent_run_start'), which implies it's for bootstrapping sessions. It also hints at alternatives by stating what it does not do, but lacks explicit 'use this when' or 'use that instead' guidance. It's clear but not fully prescriptive about selection.

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

All TeamShared 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