recordari

connect

Create one or more typed connections between memories. relationship: connects_to (default) | depends_on | led_to | blocked_by | contradicts | resolved | caused_by | unblocks | is_example_of — or any custom type. relationship=resolved adjudicates a contradiction between the exact from_memory/to_memory ids you pass: it is pure-additive and does NOT remove any existing contradicts connection between the pair — both remain on the record, preserving the full contradicts-then-resolved timeline. "Works on any pair" means you do not need to have called connect(relationship=contradicts) first — it does NOT mean any topically-similar pair will do. If you are resolving a hit from audit(mode=stale) or a possible_contradicts suggestion, verify the exact two ids first with why_connected rather than inferring them from labels alone — a newer or related memory with a similar label has a different id from the one actually holding the contradicts connection, and resolving the wrong pair leaves the real contradiction unadjudicated with no error to warn you. Optionally pass verdict (false_positive | reconciled | superseded) to classify the outcome; stored on the connection and returned by recall. Once resolved, the pair stops surfacing in audit(mode=stale) and its contradicts penalty in significance(mode=trust) is lifted. When relationship=resolved and either endpoint is human-owned by another workspace member, override_reason (required) and override_confirm=true (required) are needed — Editor or Owner role only; agent-owned or your own human-owned endpoints need no override. override_reason/override_confirm apply to the single-memory form only — batch connect has no override path for such resolutions; call connect individually instead. Single: pass fields directly. Batch: {items:[{from_memory,to_memory,relationship,narrative},...]} — returns {edges_created:N} and, when present, rejections:[{from_memory,to_memory,error_class,message}] for items that could not be applied.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`items`	No
`verdict`	No
`narrative`	No
`to_memory`	No
`from_memory`	No
`relationship`	No
`override_reason`	No
`override_confirm`	No

Schema Changelog

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

First observedAug 31, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description reveals important behaviors beyond the sparse annotations: relationship=resolved is pure-additive and does not remove existing contradicts connections, wrong-pair resolutions fail silently, override requires Editor/Owner role, and resolved pairs stop appearing in audit and significance. This is exactly the kind of behavioral context annotations do not provide.

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?

The description is dense and long, but nearly every sentence carries essential caveats or constraints. It front-loads the core purpose and relationship list before diving into edge cases, though the run-on style and heavy use of quotes make it harder to scan quickly.

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 tool's complexity, lack of output schema, and conditional authorization requirements, the description covers the critical ground: single vs batch, return shape, rejection reporting, cross-owner overrides, and integration with audit and significance. An agent has enough to call this tool correctly in most scenarios.

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?

With zero schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining relationship values/default, verdict options, override_reason/override_confirm conditions, and batch structure. However, narrative is only mentioned in the batch shape without any semantic explanation, and from_memory/to_memory are described indirectly as ids rather than explicitly defined.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Create one or more typed connections between memories.' It enumerates the supported relationship types, including a default, so an agent knows exactly what the tool does and can distinguish it from sibling tools like disconnect.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance, including verifying ids with why_connected before resolving audit suggestions, using the single form when override is needed, and avoiding batch connect for resolved cross-owner conflicts. It also clarifies the intended scope of 'works on any pair,' preventing misuse.

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

All recordari tools Inspect

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

A4.2/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Each tool targets a distinct operation—lifecycle (remember/revise/forget), graph edges (connect/disconnect/why_connected), retrieval (recall/search/recent/history/orient/significance)—and the descriptions carefully disambiguate overlaps. However, the read/analysis cluster (recent, history, orient.recent, significance) could still cause initial misselection before reading the detailed descriptions.

Naming Consistency3/5

Names are readable and consistently lowercase, but they do not follow a single convention: most are bare verbs (connect, remember, revise, search, visualise) while others are nouns (domains, history, recent, significance) and two are multiword phrases (suggest_connections, why_connected). This mix is still predictable enough to navigate, but less coherent than a uniform verb_noun surface.

Tool Count4/5

16 tools is slightly above the typical 3–15 band, but the scope of a knowledge-graph memory server justifies the breadth: CRUD, connections, domain admin, and multiple query/analysis tools are all represented. No tool feels redundant enough to cut, though the set is at the heavy end.

Completeness4/5

Core lifecycle is well covered: create/read/update/archive/purge, connection creation/removal, domain admin, and multiple query/analysis modes. The main gap is that bulk domain merge (merge_domains) is referenced in tool descriptions but not exposed as an MCP tool, so agents must direct users to an external admin interface for that operation.

Resources

Need Help?