Skip to main content
Glama

Pathrule

by io.pathrule

Pathrule Update Memory

pathrule_update_memory
Destructive

Update a memory's content or title, optionally moving it. Uses optimistic concurrency via expected_version_id. Cloud-only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleNoOptional replacement memory title.
contentYesReplacement memory body in clear project-language prose.
memory_idYesMemory UUID returned by pathrule_get_context, pathrule_goto, or pathrule_read_memory.
move_to_pathNoOptional workspace-relative destination path such as /packages/app. Missing nodes are created when allowed by the backend.
workspace_idYesWorkspace UUID from pathrule_list_workspaces.
related_pathsNoOptional list of workspace-relative paths this memory is also relevant to. null = unchanged. Pass [] to clear all manual links. Max 32 entries.
allow_duplicateNoSet true only when intentionally allowing another memory with the same title.
expected_version_idNoOptional optimistic-concurrency token from the existing record. Pass it when available to avoid overwriting a newer edit.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYestrue when the call succeeded. false when it did not, in which case `error` carries the reason and the success fields are absent.
dataNoUpdated memory: id, version_id, and the title it now carries.
errorNoPresent only when ok is false.
human_messageNoOne-line summary of the result, safe to relay to the user verbatim.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "description": "Updated memory: id, version_id, and the title it now carries."
+    },
+    "error": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "description": "Present only when ok is false.",
+      "properties": {
+        "code": {
+          "description": "Stable machine-readable failure code, for example insufficient_scope, workspace_id_required, rate_limited, not_found, or upstream_error. Branch on this, not on message text.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "detail": {
+          "description": "Optional structured context for the failure, for example { missing_scopes: [...] } on insufficient_scope."
+        },
+        "message": {
+          "description": "Human-readable explanation of the failure.",
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "code",
+        "message"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "human_message": {
+      "description": "One-line summary of the result, safe to relay to the user verbatim.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "description": "true when the call succeeded. false when it did not, in which case `error` carries the reason and the success fields are absent.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "ok"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint true, and the description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: optimistic concurrency via expected_version_id and the Cloud-only deployment constraint. It does not detail every side effect, but combined with annotations the mutation profile is clear.

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?

Three short sentences front-load the action and add only high-value constraints (move, optimistic concurrency, cloud-only). No filler or repetition of schema content.

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 an output schema, annotations, and full parameter coverage, the description plus structured data are sufficient for correct invocation. It covers the core update, optional move, concurrency guard, and cloud-only restriction; any remaining comparison to write_memory belongs to usage guidance rather than completeness.

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%, so the schema already documents all eight parameters. The description's mention of content/title and optional moving mirrors schema fields without adding new semantic detail, matching the baseline for fully covered schemas.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Update a memory's content or title') and adds the optional move behavior, making the core operation clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling pathrule_write_memory, so it falls just short of full sibling distinction.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The intended use is implied: call this when modifying an existing memory's content, title, or path. There is no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives such as pathrule_write_memory for creation, so the agent must infer selection from the verb 'update'.

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

All Pathrule toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Tools are grouped by resource (memory/rule/skill/workspace/snapshot/refresh) and mostly have distinct output shapes, so agents can usually pick the right one. A few retrieval tools (get_context, get_node, get_tree, goto) overlap in purpose, but their descriptions clarify resolution mode vs full tree vs context bundle.

Naming Consistency3/5

All tools share the pathrule_ prefix and mostly follow verb_noun, but the verbs are inconsistent: create_workspace vs write_memory, get_node vs read_memory, delete_skill vs remove_pattern, plus verb-only exceptions like goto, setup, and ping. The pattern is readable but not uniform.

Tool Count2/5

32 tools is above the 25-tool threshold and feels heavy for a single server, even with a broad domain. Several context-retrieval tools and read/list variants could potentially be consolidated, though each tool does have a specific purpose.

Completeness4/5

Core CRUD is covered for memories, rules, and skills, along with workspaces, snapshots, refresh tasks, and pattern import/removal. Minor gaps include no standalone list_rules/list_skills and no snapshot update/delete, but agents can work around these via get_context, goto, and get_tree.

Resources