fetchRetrieve a memory's full text, history, and sources using its ID. Cite the returned URL whenever you reference the memory.
Fetch the full text of a memory by its id (from search), with its history and sources. Cite its url when you use it.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Memory id |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context: it returns full text, history, and sources, and instructs the agent to cite the URL. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core function and complemented by a usage instruction. There is no redundant or filler content.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple single-parameter read tool, the description is complete: it names the return contents (full text, history, sources), gives the sourcing instruction, and annotations cover safety. No additional context seems necessary for correct invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, with the single 'id' parameter already documented as 'Memory id'. The description only repeats that the id comes from search, adding minimal semantic value beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a specific verb ('Fetch'), a specific resource ('a memory by its id'), and clarifies the scope ('full text... with its history and sources'). It is clearly distinguished from the sibling 'search' by referencing results from search.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly indicates this tool is used on memory ids obtained from search, giving clear operational context. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the workflow dependency is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.