Skip to main content
Glama
LeandroPG19

Cuba-Memorys

by LeandroPG19
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

memory_proyecto

Isolate memories per project to prevent cross-project bleed when sharing one database. Switch, list, or backfill project scopes for the active session.

Instructions

[alias of cuba_proyecto] Project scoping (v0.8): isolate memories per project so multiple projects sharing one DB don't bleed into each other. Active project is bound to the current session (cuba_jornada start --project NAME). Legacy NULL project_id rows are hidden while a project is active unless faro include_unscoped=true or you backfill them.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNoDestination name (for rename/merge)
nameNoProject name (for switch/stats/rename source/backfill)
actionYesProject action. backfill assigns every NULL project_id row to `name` (dry-run unless confirm=true).
confirmNobackfill only: write the assignment. Default false (dry-run).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.27.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / action / description
      Previous value: -"Project action"New value: +"Project action. backfill assigns every NULL project_id row to `name` (dry-run unless confirm=true)."
    • changedInput schema / properties / action / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "list",
-  "current",
-  "switch",
-  "stats",
-  "rename",
-  "merge"
-]New value: +[
+  "list",
+  "current",
+  "switch",
+  "stats",
+  "rename",
+  "merge",
+  "backfill"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirm
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "backfill only: write the assignment. Default false (dry-run).",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Previous value: -"Project name (for switch/stats/rename source)"New value: +"Project name (for switch/stats/rename source/backfill)"
  2. Addedv0.25.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and it does disclose one non-obvious trait: NULL project_id rows are hidden while a project is active. It says nothing about the side effects of rename/merge, reversibility, permissions, or confirmation requirements beyond what the schema already states.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose in the first clause and keeps the alias/version notes brief. The second sentence is dense but every clause carries information; nothing is wasted.

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

Completeness2/5

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

This is a multi-action tool with seven enum values, no annotations, and no output schema, yet the description explains none of the actions (list, current, switch, stats, rename, merge, backfill) or their return shapes. For a tool of this complexity the description is materially incomplete.

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 schema already documents action, name, to, and confirm. The description adds only the backfill dry-run nuance, which the schema also states, so it does not meaningfully exceed the baseline.

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?

States a specific concept and verb-domain: project scoping that isolates memories per project so DBs don't bleed between projects, and explicitly flags itself as an alias of cuba_proyecto. The domain is unmistakable, though the seven actions it actually performs are never enumerated beyond what the schema's enum provides.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Gives real context for when scoping applies (active project bound to session via cuba_jornada start --project NAME) and when legacy rows surface (faro include_unscoped=true or backfill). However it gives no guidance on choosing among the seven actions or when to prefer the canonical cuba_proyecto over this alias.

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