Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to CP Memory

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      F
      maintenance
      Local-first, auditable memory for AI agents. Provides durable context for MCP hosts with SQLite storage, CLI, and MCP tools for memory management.
      2
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      A local-first MCP memory server providing persistent, searchable memory for AI agents, powered by SQLite.
      1 npm
      1
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Persistent long-term memory for MCP clients. Store and recall semantic facts, episodic events, and task state with vector-based relevance search. Write what matters, retrieve what's needed — memory that persists across sessions and agents, backed by a local SQLite store with optional embeddings for meaning-based lookup. Simple file-based storage, no external services required.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Local long-term memory service for AI agents via MCP, using SQLite with tools for memory CRUD, semantic search, time-based facts, and graph capabilities.
      27
      13 npm
      1
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Local-first cross-agent memory for AI coding agents. Persistent, shared memory over MCP — what you tell one agent can be recalled by another — with all data stored in a single local SQLite file, no cloud and no API keys.
      -
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      F
      maintenance
      Local-first MCP memory server that gives AI coding agents long-term memory via SQLite and sqlite-vec, with optional LLM-powered layering. No gateway or API key required.
      7
      102 npm
      4
      MIT

    TDQS

    C2.9/5.0

    Scored across 40 tools

    Disambiguation2/5

    Several tools have unclear boundaries: memory_add vs memory_update vs memory_personal_add overlap, and memory_correct, memory_review_apply, and memory_personal_resolve all support similar marking actions. The review cluster (memory_personal_review, memory_review_digest, memory_review_inbox) and retrieval cluster (memory_search, memory_recall, memory_restore_context) also create confusion.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    Most tools follow a memory_<noun>_<verb> pattern, but there are notable exceptions like memory_add, memory_list, memory_recall, memory_restore_context, memory_review_digest, and memory_review_inbox. The naming is readable and consistently prefixed with memory_, but the mixed verb/noun order and noun-only names prevent a higher score.

    Tool Count2/5

    At 40 tools, this server is overbuilt for a coherent tool set. Many tools could be consolidated, especially the review, correction, and inspection clusters, which inflate the count without adding clear distinct value.

    Completeness4/5

    The core memory lifecycle is well covered with add, update, remove, search, inspect, aliases, links, conflicts, maintenance, and governance tools. Minor gaps exist in subdomains such as workflows, decisions, aliases, and links, where add/list/save exists but dedicated remove/update operations are missing or indirect.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessUnresponsive