Maindex Expert Memory Service

memory_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

List memories with filters (tags, kind, canon_status, collection, session, confidence range, tag facets). Read-only. Returns { items, total }.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "memory_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`kind`	No	Filter by memory kind
`sort`	No	Sort field	updated_at
`tags`	No	Filter by tags (AND semantics by default)
`team`	No	Team slug filter. Omit for mixed personal+team results. Use "personal" for personal-only.
`limit`	No	Maximum number of results to return
`order`	No	Sort order: ascending or descending	desc
`offset`	No	Number of results to skip for pagination
`status`	No	Filter by status: active, stale, deleted
`tag_mode`	No	Tag matching mode: all (AND) or any (OR)	all
`tag_facet`	No	Filter by tag facet: domain, project, function, status, topic
`collection`	No	Filter by collection slug or ID
`session_id`	No	Filter by interaction session
`canon_status`	No	Filter by canon status
`updated_after`	No	Only memories updated after this ISO 8601 datetime
`max_confidence`	No	Maximum confidence as an integer percentage from 0 to 100
`min_confidence`	No	Minimum confidence as an integer percentage from 0 to 100
`updated_before`	No	Only memories updated before this ISO 8601 datetime
`conversation_key`	No	Filter by conversation key
`conversation_type`	No	Filter by conversation type
`verification_status`	No	Filter by verification status

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`items`	Yes	Memory items
`total`	Yes	Total matching count

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 8, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, and the description's 'Read-only' merely restates that. The return shape { items, total } is extra context, but the output schema exists and already covers return values, so added behavior disclosure is thin.

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?

Three short, front-loaded sentences with no wasted wording. Minor redundancy: 'Read-only' duplicates the annotations and the { items, total } return note duplicates the output schema.

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?

For a 20-parameter, all-optional listing tool with full schema coverage, a complete output schema, and rich annotations, the description is adequate: it signals the intent, the filter breadth, and the safe read nature. The main gap is the absence of any routing signal against memory_search and memory_recall.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% with 20 documented parameters, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description lists filter families (tags, kind, canon_status, collection, session, confidence range, tag facets) but adds no semantics beyond the schema, and omits sort, order, limit, and offset entirely.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource ('List memories') and enumerates the main filter families, so the operation is unambiguous. However, it never differentiates itself from the overlapping siblings memory_search and memory_recall, which an agent would also consider for retrieval.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives. With memory_search and memory_recall present as siblings with heavily overlapping retrieval semantics, the agent is left to infer that this tool is the enumerate-and-paginate path.

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

All Maindex Expert Memory Service tools Inspect

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

Need Help?