Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
engram-mcp

engram-mcp

by Cartisien
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

graph

Retrieve relationships and source memories for a specified entity from the knowledge graph. Provide session ID and entity name.

Instructions

Query the knowledge graph for an entity — returns relationships and source memories. Requires ENGRAM_GRAPH=1.

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": {
      "sessionId": "<sessionId>",
      "entity": "<entity>"
    },
    "name": "graph"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sessionIdYesSession identifier
entityYesEntity name to look up (case-insensitive)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided. Description only says what it returns but does not disclose side effects, auth needs, or other behavioral traits. For a tool with no annotations, this is insufficient.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with verb 'Query' and resource 'knowledge graph'. Excellent 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?

Simple tool with 2 required params and no output schema. Description explains purpose and a requirement flag, but lacks details on return format, error states, or pagination. Adequate but not complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema fully describes the two parameters. Description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline of 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 queries a knowledge graph for an entity and returns relationships and source memories. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like recall and history.

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?

Description mentions requirement ENGRAM_GRAPH=1 but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus siblings. Usage context is implied but not formal.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools