Skip to main content
Glama

brief_memory

Create a structured memory brief by retrieving and summarizing relevant memories, then persist it as a reusable asset indexed for future recall.

Instructions

Create a structured memory brief by retrieving and summarizing relevant memories, then persist it as a reusable asset indexed for future recall. Use this when you want to consolidate scattered knowledge on a topic into a single retrievable document. Side effect: writes a new brief asset to disk and indexes it in the vector store for future search.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesNatural language topic or task to brief, e.g. 'deployment pipeline architecture decisions'
limitNoMaximum number of source memories to include in the brief (default: 8)
scopeNoRestrict search to a specific scope, e.g. 'project:myapp'. Omit to use the default scope
sessionIdNoSession identifier to infer session-scoped search, e.g. 'abc123'
allScopesNoSet to true to search across all scopes instead of the default scope
profileNoRetrieval profile that tunes ranking weights: 'writing' for narrative, 'debug' for technical, 'fact-check' for high-precision
titleNoHuman-readable title for the brief asset, e.g. 'Q1 Auth Migration Summary'. Auto-generated if omitted
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a side effect: 'writes a new brief asset to disk and indexes it in the vector store.' This is helpful but lacks further detail on permissions, reversibility, or constraints. With no annotations, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: core function, usage guidance, and side effect. It is front-loaded with the most critical information. No superfluous text, perfect 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 description covers purpose and side effects, it does not explain the return value of the tool, which is important given no output schema. Additionally, it does not relate this tool to similar memory tools. The 100% schema coverage partially compensates, but completeness is moderate.

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%, meaning the schema already explains all parameters. The description adds no additional parameter-specific information beyond the schema. Thus, baseline 3 is correct.

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 clearly states the tool creates a 'structured memory brief' by retrieving and summarizing memories, and it is used to consolidate scattered knowledge. It provides a specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like store_memory or distill_memory, making it a 4 rather than 5.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explicitly says 'Use this when you want to consolidate scattered knowledge on a topic into a single retrievable document,' giving clear context for appropriate use. It does not, however, mention when not to use it or alternatives, so it scores 4.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/AliceLJY/recallnest'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server