Skip to main content
Glama
EmjayAhn

Pensieve MCP Server

by EmjayAhn

save_conversation

Save conversation history to enable sharing between ChatGPT and Claude with secure multi-user support. Store messages, metadata, and manage conversations across AI platforms.

Instructions

대화 내역을 저장합니다

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
conversation_idNo대화 ID (없으면 자동 생성)
messagesYes저장할 메시지 목록
metadataNo대화에 대한 추가 메타데이터 (제목, 태그 등)

Implementation Reference

  • The core logic implementation of the save_conversation tool which saves the conversation to a JSON file and cache.
    def save_conversation(conversation_id: str, messages: List[Dict[str, Any]], metadata: Optional[Dict[str, Any]] = None) -> Dict[str, Any]:
        """대화를 파일 시스템에 저장"""
        conversation_data = {
            "id": conversation_id,
            "messages": messages,
            "metadata": metadata or {},
            "created_at": datetime.now().isoformat(),
            "updated_at": datetime.now().isoformat()
        }
        
        # 파일로 저장
        file_path = STORAGE_DIR / f"{conversation_id}.json"
        with open(file_path, 'w', encoding='utf-8') as f:
            json.dump(conversation_data, f, ensure_ascii=False, indent=2)
        
        # 캐시에도 저장
        conversation_cache[conversation_id] = conversation_data
        
        return conversation_data
  • MCP tool registration for save_conversation in the list_tools method.
    Tool(
        name="save_conversation",
        description="대화 내역을 저장합니다",
        inputSchema={
            "type": "object",
            "properties": {
                "conversation_id": {
                    "type": "string",
                    "description": "대화 ID (없으면 자동 생성)"
                },
                "messages": {
                    "type": "array",
                    "description": "저장할 메시지 목록",
                    "items": {
                        "type": "object",
                        "properties": {
                            "role": {"type": "string", "enum": ["user", "assistant", "system"]},
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but reveals minimal behavior. It implies a write operation ('저장합니다' - saves) but doesn't disclose permissions needed, whether it's idempotent, error conditions, or side effects. It mentions auto-generation of conversation_id if missing, which is useful, but lacks details on storage format, persistence, or response format.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's appropriately brief given the tool's straightforward name, though this conciseness comes at the cost of detail. Every word earns its place in conveying the core action.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a mutation tool with 3 parameters, nested objects, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what happens on success/failure, return values, or how it interacts with sibling tools. The auto-generation hint for conversation_id is helpful but doesn't compensate for missing behavioral and contextual details.

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 description coverage is 100%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond the schema's details for conversation_id, messages, and metadata. Baseline score of 3 applies as the schema handles parameter documentation adequately.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description '대화 내역을 저장합니다' (Saves conversation history) states the basic action but is vague about scope and mechanism. It doesn't specify whether this creates new conversations or updates existing ones, nor does it differentiate from sibling tools like 'append_to_conversation' or 'load_conversation'. The description essentially restates the tool name without adding meaningful specificity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines1/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, when to choose 'save_conversation' over 'append_to_conversation' for updates, or how it relates to 'list_conversations' or 'search_conversations'. The description offers no context for decision-making among siblings.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/EmjayAhn/pensieve-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server