Dawnmere
Related Servers
Alternatives to Dawnmere
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceGives Claude Desktop, Cursor, Cline, and other MCP-compatible AI tools persistent memory, enabling them to store and recall information seamlessly across sessions.9 npm1Apache 2.0- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceGives Claude Code, Claude Desktop, Cursor, VS Code Copilot, and other MCP-compatible tools persistent memory.1862 npm1MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI apps such as Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, VS Code and Codex to share one searchable memory, so a fact told to one app can be recalled in another with the exact line, speaker and date it came from. Users sign in per app and can allow read-only or read-and-write access, saving, correcting or forgetting memories and disconnecting apps at any time.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceGives every Claude surface (claude.ai, Desktop, mobile, Office add-ins, Claude Code) read and write access to the memories, transcripts and notes produced by Claude Code instances on all of your machines, with hybrid keyword and semantic search. Runs as a self-hosted remote MCP server with GitHub allowlist authentication, secret redaction and audit logging.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceGives every MCP-capable AI agent a shared, local-first memory store, letting them save, search, update, and delete preferences, decisions, and facts kept as plain Markdown files versioned in git. Memories are ranked by relevance on recall and shared across Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, and any other MCP client.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceGives Claude Code persistent cross-session memory with semantic search over facts, decisions, and lessons, plus automatic tracking of user corrections and behavioral patterns. Enables a Claude that evolves reusable frameworks over time — promoting what works and retiring what doesn't — all locally through MCP tools and hooks.6 npmMIT
TDQS
Scored across 4 tools
Each tool maps to a clearly distinct operation in a memory lifecycle: search (recall), create/update (remember), retire (forget), and inspect visibility (access_status). There is no meaningful overlap; an agent can select the right tool from the user's intent alone.
recall, remember, and forget form a consistent single-verb pattern, but access_status breaks it as a verb_noun compound. Still readable and predictable enough that agents will not misroute based on naming.
Four tools is well-scoped for a focused memory service, with each tool earning its place in a compact read/write/delete/status surface. Nothing feels padded or missing at the count level.
Create, search, and delete are covered, and near-duplicate handling in remember effectively provides update. However, forget explicitly says memories can be restored later but no restore tool is exposed, and there is no explicit update operation outside near-duplicate detection—notable gaps for a memory lifecycle.