Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MemAI

MemAI

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

set_confidence

Idempotent

Set a memory's confidence to unverified, confirmed, or contradicted based on evidence. Contradicted memories sort last and drop from must-read lists, stopping wrong claims from guiding work.

Instructions

Set a memory's confidence: unverified | confirmed | contradicted.

Call it once evidence settles a claim: the code, a run or a source checked against the memory. A contradicted memory sorts last in search and is left out of the notes, pitfalls and handoffs must_read() lists and of the checkpoint pulse() returns, so a claim known to be wrong stops steering work while it stays readable; unverified and confirmed rank alike. To correct the text, edit_memory(); to retire it, forget().

Now and then a result of any memai tool carries confidence_reminder: memories still unverified past the span set in the dashboard, those in the call's domain first. Settle the ones this session's evidence reaches; it refuses nothing.

Returns {"ok": True}, {"ok": False} for an unknown uid, or an error for any other value.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
uidYesthe memory.
confidenceYesunverified, confirmed or contradicted.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv0.16.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / confidence / description
      Added value: +"unverified, confirmed or contradicted."
    • removedInput schema / properties / confidence / title
      Removed value: -"Confidence"
    • addedInput schema / properties / uid / description
      Added value: +"the memory."
    • removedInput schema / properties / uid / title
      Removed value: -"Uid"
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"set_confidenceArguments"
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare idempotent, non-destructive and non-open-world, and the description goes well beyond them: contr adicted memories sort last in search, are excluded from must_read()/pulse() outputs, remain readable, and unverified vs confirmed rank alike. It also documents the return shapes and the unknown-uid failure mode. Slight markdown is the somewhat ambiguous 'it refuses nothing' line.

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 and value set are front-loaded in the first clause, followed by consequences and alternatives. The middle paragraph about confidence_reminder on 'any memai tool' is useful but sits outside this tool's direct scope and lengthens the definition.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description supplies the return contract ({ok: True}/{ok: False}/error). For a two-parameter, idempotent state-setter with full annotation coverage, nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100% and both schema descriptions already name the parameters and the value set, so the baseline is 3. The description's added meaning for 'confidence' (the ranking/exclusion consequence of each value) is behavioral rather than syntactic, and adds nothing about uid beyond what the schema states.

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 ('Set a memory's confidence') and enumerates the exact value set. It also names the sibling boundaries explicitly — edit_memory() for text changes, forget() for retirement — so an agent can place it immediately among the 40+ siblings.

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?

Gives the trigger condition precisely: 'Call it once evidence settles a claim: the code, a run or a source checked against the memory.' It also routes to the two adjacent alternatives with their own conditions, plus guidance tied to the confidence_reminder signal, which is explicit when-to-act context.

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