Skip to main content
Glama

revise

IMPORTANT — bulk domain migration: domain moves via revise are for individual corrections only. If the user needs to move many memories between domains, inform the user that bulk migration must be performed via the admin interface (merge_domains) — do not attempt to replicate a merge by looping revise calls. Update one or more existing memories. Omitted fields are unchanged. Single: pass fields directly — returns {updated, connections, suggested_connections, applicable_standing_rules} and, when the filing-time threshold is crossed, possible_contradicts + possible_contradicts_candidates (same shapes as remember()). Batch: {items:[{id,...},...]} — returns {items:[{id, updated, connections, suggested_connections, applicable_standing_rules, ...}]} with a per-item envelope on each success, not only an updated count. After every successful revise — plain update, override, claim, or supersede — review applicable_standing_rules (domain-scoped standing rules, distance-independent), connections, suggested_connections, and possible_contradicts in the same turn; do not defer to a separate recall or suggest_connections call. Semantic similarity reflects aboutness, not agreement; the server surfaces candidates that may warrant your review but never asserts they conflict. Every memory has an owner (whoever created it) — revising a memory you don't own is rejected with error_class=forbidden unless you are an Editor or Owner and supply override_reason (required) plus override_confirm=true (required only when the memory is human-owned; not required for agent-owned or ownerless memories). The override path requires a session with a workspace role (a human JWT session, or a personal key linked to an Editor/Owner user); sessions on plain workspace keys cannot override regardless of arguments. An override changes content in-place, not ownership — substantive changes (label, description, why_matters, node_kind) on a foreign-owned memory are rejected; use supersede=true instead, which creates your successor memory, archives the original intact, and wires a supersedes relationship. supersede=true (single-memory form only) returns {superseded, archived_id, archived_connections} plus the revise envelope on the successor; foreign supersede uses the same override_reason/override_confirm ceremony. Correction-class overrides (tags, occurred_at, transient) may still use in-place override. override_reason/override_confirm/supersede apply to the single-memory form only — batch revise has no override or supersede path: if any item in the batch targets a memory you don't own, the whole batch is rejected and none of it applies; revise that item individually instead. claim=true (single-memory form only) makes an ownerless memory (owner_id IS NULL — either it predates ownership tracking, or was orphaned by a member offboard) yours: requires Editor or Owner role, is rejected with error_class=validation if the memory already has an owner (use override or supersede instead), and error_class=conflict if someone else claimed it first (race). claim never moves a memory from one owner to another — only from no owner to you — and may be combined with other field updates in the same call. domain (single-memory form only) moves the memory to a different domain; domain_move_reason is required when domain is present — the call is rejected with error_class=validation if domain_move_reason is absent; domain equal to the memory's current domain is also rejected. On failure, content[0].text is JSON: {"error_class": "not_found|conflict|retryable|forbidden|validation|internal", "message": "..."}. Switch on error_class: retry on retryable, surface message on validation, re-fetch on not_found.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNo
tagsNo
claimNo
itemsNo
labelNo
domainNo
node_kindNoClassification of this memory. One of: 'transient' (temporary, will expire), 'decision' (a specific decision made, default), 'standing' (a durable rule or principle), 'reference' (a person, system, or org — referential rather than propositional knowledge), 'issue' (an open question or problem), 'option' (a considered alternative), 'assumption' (an unverified premise), 'finding' (an observed fact or result), or 'goal' (a desired outcome). Absent defaults to 'decision'. Takes precedence over the transient bool field when both are supplied.
supersedeNo
transientNo
descriptionNo
occurred_atNoWhen this event actually happened (not when it is being filed). Format: YYYY-MM-DD or RFC3339. Two cases: (a) Events you directly witnessed during the current session (e.g. a decision made in the live conversation) — set occurred_at without asking; if the user did not specify a date, use today. (b) Inferred or back-dated historical events you did not directly observe — propose+confirm: state the date and your reasoning, ask the user to confirm, and only set occurred_at once confirmed. Never guess a historical date and never infer it silently from context. Turn-boundary rule: when proposing to file something as significant, the proposal must be the only action in that turn — do not include occurred_at in any remember or revise call in the same message as the proposal. Only set occurred_at in a subsequent call, after the user has replied. Always set why_matters when using occurred_at.
why_mattersNo
override_reasonNo
override_confirmNo
domain_move_reasonNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only say readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false; the description adds rich behavioral detail beyond that — ownership enforcement, the override_reason/override_confirm ceremony and its role/session requirements, that supersede creates a successor and archives the original intact (consistent with destructiveHint=false), claim semantics and race behavior, domain_move_reason requirement, and batch atomicity. This is far more than the annotations convey and does not contradict them.

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 most consequential rule — the bulk-migration warning — is front-loaded, and the body is organized into single/batch/override/supersede/claim/domain mode blocks. It is dense and repeats some boilerplate (the override ceremony, the error_class rejection phrasing) across modes, but for a tool with this much branching behavior most sentences earn their place.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by specifying the single-form return shape (updated, connections, suggested_connections, applicable_standing_rules, possible_contradicts) and the per-item batch envelope, plus the full error taxonomy (error_class values) and the recommended response to each. Given 15 parameters and moderate annotations, nothing essential for calling it correctly is missing.

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 only 13% across 15 params, so the description must carry the semantic load, and it does for the hard cases: claim, supersede, override_reason/override_confirm, domain/domain_move_reason, and the items batch envelope all get precise meaning. The simple fields (tags, label, why_matters, transient) are covered only by the generic 'omitted fields are unchanged' rule, leaving a modest residual gap given the very low coverage.

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 by naming the specific verb+resource ('Update one or more existing memories') and then enumerates the distinct operation modes (plain update, override, supersede, claim, domain move, single vs batch). It explicitly contrasts with siblings, warning against looping revise to emulate merge_domains and comparing return shapes to remember(), so an agent can distinguish it from remember/forget/connect without opening any schema.

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 routing: individual corrections via revise, bulk migration via the admin interface; override vs supersede vs claim each have stated conditions; batch has no override path so an unowned item must be revised individually. Alternative tools (merge_domains, recall, suggest_connections, remember) are named with the condition that selects them.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources