Skip to main content
Glama
LeandroPG19

Cuba-Memorys

by LeandroPG19
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

cuba_remedio

Record a fix for a known error using its ID and solution, then cross-reference similar unresolved errors so related issues can be traced and resolved.

Instructions

Mark an error as resolved with solution. Cross-references similar unresolved errors.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
error_idYesUUID of the error to solve
solutionYesSolution that fixed the error
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

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a meaningful side effect — that similar unresolved errors are cross-referenced — but says nothing about permissions, reversibility, or whether the resolution is broadcast/persisted elsewhere, and the sensitive allow_secret behavior is only 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?

Two short front-loaded sentences with no filler; the action comes first and the side effect second. It is efficiently sized, if a little terse for a mutation tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description should say more about what happens on success and what the cross-referencing returns. It covers the core mutation but leaves the agent guessing about the response and about failure modes.

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 error_id, solution, and allow_secret are already fully documented including the credential-refusal warning. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides; baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a concrete verb+resource: marking an error as resolved with a solution, plus the cross-referencing side effect. That is far clearer than the opaque tool name 'cuba_remedio', though it does nothing to distinguish this from the many similarly cryptic siblings (memory_remedio, cuba_alarma, etc.).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternative tool is named. The agent must infer that this is the call to make after fixing a problem, with nothing saying how it relates to the sibling remedio/alarma tools.

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