memory-manager-mcp

Get memory

get_memory

Retrieve a single memory by its unique ID from the local persistent memory store, giving you direct access to stored project context for AI coding agents.

Instructions

Retrieve a single memory by id.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "memoryId": "<memoryId>"
    },
    "name": "get_memory"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`memoryId`	Yes	Memory id (mem_...).
`workspacePath`	No	Workspace directory of the project. Defaults to the server working directory.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.5.0Aug 17, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It only says 'Retrieve' without confirming that the operation is read-only or non-destructive, nor does it describe behavior such as return when not found or any side effects. Adding details like 'read-only' or 'does not modify' would improve 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 a single sentence of 7 words, with no filler. It is front-loaded with the core action and achieves maximum conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Although the tool is simple, the description lacks context about return values (no output schema) and the workspacePath parameter's effect. Given multiple sibling tools, a bit more context on how this fits the workflow would improve 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%, with memoryId and workspacePath both described. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves a single memory by its id, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from search_memory (which likely queries) and save_memory (which writes).

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 phrase 'by id' implies usage when memoryId is known, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. Alternatives like search_memory are not mentioned, leaving the usage context implicit.

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

Deploy Server