aziel-runtime

Observe a memory

memory_observe

Record a new fact observation as an append-only learn-chain stamp, preserving it for later calibration and recall. Use this when you have a fact to note before resolving an outcome.

Instructions

Append the first memory_observation to the ChainLock learn chain (AKM-TRIAD-1.0). New fact in — not an outcome resolve and not a grounded ChainLock append. Posterior ≠ truth. Use this when you have a new fact to observe before resolve/calibrate. Do not use it for grounded ChainLock append without AKM, resolving an outcome, or ranked recall; use chainlock_append, memory_resolve, or memory_recall instead. Write: additive learn-chain stamp. authorizes_action stays false. Hash-only cards refuse AKM-NO-FACT. Append-only; there is no memory_delete. fact is required (≤160). subject/memory_id/use_case optional. Mutation requires confirm=true (runtime gate) or dry_run=true (preview only, no write). confirm and dry_run stay optional on inputSchema.required. Returns memory_id, observation stamp, and display envelope (belief is not truth).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`fact`	Yes	Fact text clipped to 160 characters. Required on observe. Hash-only cards refuse AKM-NO-FACT.
`confirm`	No	Documented confirmation flag. Optional in inputSchema.required (connector refresh must not break). tools/call still refuses MCP-CONFIRM-REQUIRED when confirm is missing or false unless dry_run=true (preview, no write).
`dry_run`	No	Optional preview flag. When true, return a would-mutate preview and do not write. Alternative to confirm=true. Does not mutate.
`subject`	No	Optional subject key clipped to 80 characters. Used to find or create memory_id.
`use_case`	No	Optional use-case label for calibration / adaptive recall ranking. Not a truth claim.
`memory_id`	No	Optional existing memory id. Alternative to subject for resolve/calibrate/get.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`code`	No	FragGate or fabric code when present: FG-OK, FG-HALLUC-TOOL, FG-STUB, FG-LOCAL-ONLY, FG-UNKNOWN-OP, FG-GATE-REFUSE, FG-LAMB-REFUSE, or a module refuse such as MESH-* / AKM-*.
`door`	No	Door name. The public door is fraggate.
`ran_in`	No	Execution locale (for example aziel-runtime) when present.
`result`	No	FragGate body: ok, code, door, slug, op, engine_digest, ran_in, provenance, refusal, limitations, receipt, plus the engine result. Unknown names refuse FG-HALLUC-TOOL; stubs refuse FG-STUB.
`status`	No	HTTP-like status when present on wrappers (200 ok; 400+ error / refuse).
`display`	No	Human-facing envelope. Show title and summary, then take the next input.
`receipt`	No	Optional receipt, ledger tip, or TemporalLock/ForgeReceipts exit when the door stamped one.
`refusal`	No	Explicit refuse object, code, or message when the door or engine refused.
`engine_op`	No	Resolved engine op when present (often inside result).
`ledger_tip`	No	Ask/refuse ledger tip when the door stamped one.
`provenance`	No	Provenance / input packet when the pipeline attached one.
`session_id`	No	Raw session id when session plumbing was used. Hidden unless the user asked for the chain.
`engine_slug`	No	Resolved engine slug when present (often inside result).
`limitations`	No	Capability limitations or Remain-OFF notes when present.
`engine_digest`	No	64-hex engine_digest when a true in-process engine ran (often inside result).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv2.0.2Sep 18, 2026

changedInput schema / description

Previous value: -"fact is required. subject/memory_id/use_case optional."New value: +"fact is required. subject/memory_id/use_case optional. Mutation requires confirm=true or dry_run=true."

addedInput schema / properties / confirm

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Documented confirmation flag. Optional in inputSchema.required (connector refresh must not break). tools/call still refuses MCP-CONFIRM-REQUIRED when confirm is missing or false unless dry_run=true (preview, no write).",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / dry_run

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional preview flag. When true, return a would-mutate preview and do not write. Alternative to confirm=true. Does not mutate.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

Addedv1.6.2Sep 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only provide flags (readOnly=false, etc.), so the description carries the full burden. It discloses mutation requirements (confirm=true or dry_run=true), append-only nature (no memory_delete), the fact that authorizes_action stays false, and the epistemic caveat ('Posterior ≠ truth'). It also explains runtime gates. This goes well beyond the minimal flag information and sets accurate expectations.

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 but every sentence adds value: action, usage, behavioral caveats, mutation gates, and returns. It is front-loaded with the primary action. While slightly long, it avoids redundancy and is well-structured for an agent to parse quickly.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (mutation, confirmation, multiple siblings), the description covers the core operational aspects: when to use, how to mutate, what it returns, and the belief-vs-truth caveat. It does not detail error scenarios or rate limits, but these are not critical for correct invocation. The output schema likely covers return structure, so that gap is acceptable.

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 100% with each parameter described. The description adds clarity on the confirm/dry_run interaction (optional in schema but required for mutation) and explains the purpose of use_case ('Not a truth claim') and the behavior of hash-only cards with fact. It adds contextual meaning beyond the raw parameter names and types.

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 ('Append the first memory_observation to the ChainLock learn chain') and immediately differentiates from siblings by naming chainlock_append, memory_resolve, and memory_recall. It clearly states this tool is for observing a new fact before resolve/calibrate, leaving no ambiguity about its role.

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 explicitly states when to use ('Use this when you have a new fact to observe before resolve/calibrate') and when not to use, listing specific alternatives ('Do not use it for grounded ChainLock append without AKM, resolving an outcome, or ranked recall; use chainlock_append, memory_resolve, or memory_recall instead'). This is model guidance.

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