Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MemAI

MemAI

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

optimize_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect an optimization run to see which suggestions were applied, rejected, or pending, and follow up using their rationale and verification details.

Instructions

Inspect one optimization run: every suggestion and its decision.

Read-only. Returns the run header plus each suggestion's kind, target_uid, payload, rationale, verified, status (pending/applied/rejected) and decided_at -- so you can tell which proposals landed, follow up on rejected ones, or build on applied ones in a later pass.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
offsetNowhere the page starts; `next_offset`, when present, starts the next.
run_idYesthe run optimize_stage returned, or one optimize_runs lists.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.16.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / offset
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "description": "where the page starts; `next_offset`, when present, starts the next.",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / run_id / description
      Added value: +"the run optimize_stage returned, or one optimize_runs lists."
    • removedInput schema / properties / run_id / title
      Removed value: -"Run Id"
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"optimize_statusArguments"
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the 'Read-only' line is largely redundant. The description earns credit instead by disclosing the return shape (run header plus per-suggestion kind, target_uid, payload, rationale, verified, status, decided_at) and the status vocabulary, which is genuinely useful given there is no output 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?

Purpose is front-loaded in one line, then a short read-only note and the payoff. The field enumeration is a long clause but it substitutes for a missing output schema, so it earns its place rather than padding.

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?

With no output schema, the description does the heavy lifting by naming the returned fields and status values, and the schema covers pagination. Slightly incomplete in that the description never mentions paging, but nothing needed to call it correctly is absent.

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%: run_id and offset are both documented in the schema, including pagination via next_offset. The description adds no extra meaning about either parameter, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Inspect one optimization run') plus the scope ('every suggestion and its decision'), which cleanly separates it from optimize_runs (lists runs) and optimize_stage (produces runs). An agent can pick this tool without opening the schema.

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 reasons to call it: tell which proposals landed, follow up on rejected ones, build on applied ones later. It does not state explicit when-not conditions, but the 'one run' scope implies alternatives already cover listing and staging.

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