Skip to main content
Glama
Cloto-dev

CPersona

Official
by Cloto-dev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

update_memory

Idempotent

Edit an existing CPersona memory by ID; locked or unauthorized changes are rejected and new content is sanitized before saving.

Instructions

Update memory content by ID. Rejects if memory is locked. Ownership enforced when agent_id provided. The new content passes through the same sanitizer as store: it is capped at the content length limit (the response carries truncated:true when the cap bit) and [Memory from ...] annotations are stripped, so content consisting only of those is refused rather than written as an empty row. A new text that runs past the embedding window gets nodes:{status:'queued'}, as on store.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contentYesNew content for the memory
agent_idNoAgent ID for ownership verification
memory_idYesMemory ID to update
session_keyNoOpaque session identity you declare: a partition hint, not authentication and not a data filter. Selects which no-persist pause applies to this call. Omit to share one bucket with every caller that omits it. Full text on recall.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.6.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / session_key / maxLength
      Added value: +256
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv2.5.10
    • addedInput schema / properties / session_key
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "",
+  "description": "Opaque session identity you declare: a partition hint, not authentication and not a data filter. Selects which no-persist pause applies to this call. Omit to share one bucket with every caller that omits it. Full text on recall.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Addedv2.4.10

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Adds substantial behavior beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false): the sanitizer passthrough, the content-length cap and the truncated:true response signal, stripping of [Memory from ...] annotations with refusal of annotation-only content, and nodes:{status:'queued'} when text exceeds the embedding window. These are non-obvious side effects an agent could not infer from structured fields.

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?

Front-loads the core action ('Update memory content by ID') before listing caveats, and every sentence carries functional detail. The later sentences are dense and somewhat run-on, but no content is wasted.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With no output schema, the description compensates by naming the response signals (truncated:true, nodes:{status:'queued'}) and the refusal case, giving an agent everything needed to interpret results. The mutation semantics, constraints, and failure modes are all covered.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: content is sanitized/capped rather than written verbatim, and agent_id activates ownership verification rather than being a passive identifier. memory_id's lock requirement is also surfaced, which the schema does not note.

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?

States a specific verb and resource with an identifier ('Update memory content by ID') and anchors it against the sibling 'store' by describing shared sanitization behavior. It doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from update_profile, but the memory-vs-profile resource split is clear from the name and text.

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?

Gives concrete operating conditions: rejection when the memory is locked, and ownership enforcement when agent_id is supplied. This tells the agent when the call will fail and what agent_id buys, though it doesn't state an explicit when-to-use or a named alternative to use instead.

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