Skip to main content
Glama
Filipe-Soares-de-Almeida

MemAI

by Filipe-Soares-de-Almeida
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

list_by_domain

Lists active memories stored under a domain and its subdomains, newest first. Use it to browse everything in a path or as a fallback when search misses.

Instructions

List active memories for a domain and its subdomains, most recent first.

Fallback when search misses. domain is a path, matched from the outermost segment in: 'acme/x100' lists the module's own memories plus every routine under it. Pass subtree=False for what is filed at exactly that path and nowhere deeper.

A domain that matches no path is retried as a run of segments INSIDE one, so list_by_domain('p200') still finds the routine once it lives at 'acme/x100/p200'. The literal reading wins whenever it has rows, and an ambiguous name (the same code under two modules) covers both branches rather than picking one -- each row's domain says which branch it came from. list_domains() is the way to see the paths first.

Returns {"results": [...], "est_tokens": N}. Content is snippet-truncated per result -- call get_memory(uid) for the full record; a result's est_tokens estimates what that full record costs, and the top-level est_tokens is the sum over the results.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeNo
limitNo
domainYes
subtreeNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / subtree
      Added value: +{
+  "default": true,
+  "title": "Subtree",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "result": {
-      "items": {
-        "additionalProperties": true,
-        "type": "object"
-      },
-      "title": "Result",
-      "type": "array"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "result"
-  ],
-  "title": "list_by_domainOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full load and does so thoroughly: path-segment matching from the outermost segment, substring retry when no path matches, literal-reading-wins precedence, ambiguity covering both branches with the `domain` field disambiguating, result truncation to snippets, and est_tokens semantics. These are genuine runtime behaviors an agent cannot infer from the schema.

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-loaded with purpose and routing before the mechanics; four short paragraphs each carrying distinct rules (fallback, path matching, substring/ambiguity retry, return shape). It is somewhat long, but almost every sentence conveys unique behavioral information rather than restating the title or schema.

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

Completeness4/5

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

No output schema exists, yet the description supplies the return shape ({"results": [...], "est_tokens": N}), the truncation caveat, and the pointer to get_memory(uid) for full records. With annotations absent and 0% schema coverage, it covers nearly everything except the meaning of the `type` and `limit` parameters.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains `domain` (path semantics, segment matching, ambiguous-name coverage) and `subtree` (exact-path vs. descendant listing) in real depth. However, `type` and `limit` receive no explanation anywhere, leaving two of four parameters undefined.

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?

The opening sentence names a specific verb and resource ('List active memories for a domain and its subdomains') plus an ordering guarantee ('most recent first'). It further positions itself against siblings by framing the tool as a 'Fallback when search misses' and pointing to list_domains() for path discovery. An agent can distinguish this from search, recall, and list_recent without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit routing rule ('Fallback when search misses'), explicit prerequisite guidance ('list_domains() is the way to see the paths first'), and explicit switch semantics ('Pass subtree=False for what is filed at exactly that path'). The fallback/ambiguity behavior tells the agent when this tool is preferable to search. Nothing material is left to inference.

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