Skip to main content
Glama
LeandroPG19

Cuba-Memorys

by LeandroPG19
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

cuba_pizarra

Store, read, and clear TTL-bounded working-memory notes for inter-step plan state, tentative observations, and cross-tool-call reminders during long-horizon agent sessions. Entries auto-expire.

Instructions

Working memory buffer (v0.9, Baddeley 1992): a TTL-bounded scratchpad orthogonal to episodic and semantic memory. Use for inter-step plan state during long-horizon agent tasks, tentative observations, cross-tool-call reminders inside one session. Auto-expire by ttl_seconds; bulk-purged by cuba_zafra REM cycle.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tagNoOptional tag for filtering on read/clear
actionYesWorking-memory operation
contentNoContent to store (for write)
ttl_secondsNoTime-to-live in seconds (default 3600)
allow_secretNoRefused when the text looks like a live credential (token, password, URL with embedded creds). Set true only for a false match — the text is then stored verbatim, in clear, and reachable by search, export and every client.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.25.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / allow_secret
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Refused when the text looks like a live credential (token, password, URL with embedded creds). Set true only for a false match — the text is then stored verbatim, in clear, and reachable by search, export and every client.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. First observedv0.18.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the TTL auto-expiry lifecycle and that cuba_zafra's REM cycle bulk-purges entries. It omits write/overwrite semantics and read/clear behavior, but the credential-refusal behavior is covered in 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?

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with the definition and followed by usage and lifecycle. The 'v0.9, Baddeley 1992' citation is mildly ornamental but does not bloat the text.

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?

For a 5-param tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies purpose, when-to-use and lifecycle. It could say more about the write/read/clear actions and what a read returns, but the schema covers the parameters adequately.

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%, so the baseline is 3; the schema already documents tag, action enum, content, ttl_seconds and allow_secret in detail. The description only echoes ttl_seconds expiry, adding little parameter meaning beyond structured fields.

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 resource ('working memory buffer... TTL-bounded scratchpad') and explicitly positions it relative to siblings by calling it 'orthogonal to episodic and semantic memory'. An agent can distinguish it from the many memory_* tools 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 Guidelines4/5

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

Gives concrete use cases: 'inter-step plan state during long-horizon agent tasks, tentative observations, cross-tool-call reminders inside one session'. Clear context for when to reach for it, though it does not explicitly name a sibling as the alternative or state when NOT to use it.

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