Skip to main content
Glama
Cloto-dev

CPersona

Official
by Cloto-dev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

update_memory

Idempotent

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…

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 another memory in the same agent, project and channel already holds is refused with ok:false naming that memory, since one copy is kept per bucket. 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?

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description goes well beyond them, disclosing sanitization rules, truncation signaling (truncated:true), duplicate-bucket refusal with ok:false naming the conflicting memory, and embedding-window queueing behavior – exactly the behavioral context annotations cannot carry.

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 and constraint in the first two sentences, then details failure modes. The middle sentence is dense and slightly run-on, but every clause carries actionable information about rejection conditions and response fields.

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?

For a mutation tool with no output schema, it explains the shape of responses (ok:false, truncated:true, nodes:{status:'queued'}) and all major failure modes, so an agent knows what outcomes to expect. Nothing essential to correct invocation is missing.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: it explains the ownership role of agent_id, the sanitizer applied to content, and that content-only annotations are refused. session_key semantics are left entirely to the already-rich schema description, which is acceptable.

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 ('Update memory content by ID') with an immediate constraint (rejects if locked). It implicitly distinguishes from store (store creates, update modifies) and from lock/delete siblings, but never names a sibling that performs an alternative path.

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 clear conditions and exclusions: refuses when locked, when ownership fails, when content is only annotations, and when the text duplicates another memory in the same agent/project/channel bucket. However, it never tells the agent which sibling to use instead (e.g., lock_memory, store) for those rejected cases.

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