Skip to main content
Glama

cuba_puente

Create, delete, traverse, infer, or predict relationships between entities in a knowledge graph, enabling reasoning and link discovery.

Instructions

Create edges between entities (uses, causes, implements, depends_on, related_to). 'traverse' explores connections, 'infer' does transitive reasoning (A→B→C), 'predict' suggests missing links via Adamic-Adar. Relations strengthen with use (Hebbian).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionYesOperation to perform. 'predict' uses Adamic-Adar to suggest missing relations.
persistNoFor predict: write the suggestions to brain_relations as provenance='predicted' (relation_type related_to) instead of only returning them. Default false — read-only.
max_depthNoMax hops for traverse/infer (default 3, max 5)
to_entityNoTarget entity name
entity_nameNoEntity name for predict action (Adamic-Adar link prediction)
from_entityNoSource entity name
start_entityNoStart point for traverse/infer
bidirectionalNoIf true, relation goes both ways
relation_typeNoRelation: uses, causes, implements, depends_on, related_to. Also used by predict+persist to pick the type for the persisted edge (default related_to).
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions 'Relations strengthen with use (Hebbian)' but does not explain what that means for the agent (e.g., automatic persistence, side effects). Critically, the delete action is omitted entirely, leaving a major behavioral gap unaddressed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short (two sentences) and front-loaded, but it omits the delete action entirely. This conciseness comes at the cost of completeness. Every sentence is functional, but the omission is a critical gap.

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?

Given the tool has 9 parameters, multiple actions, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is moderately complete. It covers create, traverse, infer, and predict, but misses delete and does not explain how bidirectional, persist, or max_depth interact with the overall behavior. The Hebbian mention is vague.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds some context (e.g., Hebbian strengthening and Adamic-Adar for predict), but this largely duplicates what's already in the action parameter description. It does not significantly deepen understanding of individual parameters beyond the schema.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description states 'Create edges between entities' but the tool also includes delete, traverse, infer, and predict actions. The first sentence is misleading as it implies only creation. It lists the relation types and explains other actions, but fails to mention delete, making the purpose incomplete.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus its siblings (e.g., cuba_vigia, cuba_proyecto). The description details when to use each action within the tool (traverse vs infer vs predict), but does not help an agent choose between this and other tools.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/LeandroPG19/cuba-memorys'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server