Turbo Quant Memory MCP Server

by Lexus2016

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

get_related_entities

Query relations for a specific entity URI to discover connected notes, files, issues, tasks, or URLs. Returns nothing when the entity has no links yet.

Instructions

Query relations involving a specific entity URI.

uri: the entity to look up, as note://<note_id>, file://<relative/path>, issue://KEY, task://KEY, or https://... — the same URI forms link_entities accepts. Returns nothing for an entity that has no links yet.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "uri": "<uri>"
    },
    "name": "get_related_entities"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`uri`	Yes
`scope`	No	hybrid
`relation_type`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.36.1Nov 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose a genuine behavioral trait: it 'returns nothing for an entity that has no links yet,' which prevents an agent from misreading an empty result as an error. It omits permission/visibility scoping and says nothing about what 'hybrid' scope means behaviorally, but the empty-result disclosure is real added value beyond 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?

Front-loaded with the purpose in one sentence, then the parameter detail, then the empty-result caveat — no wasted prose. The parameter note is slightly cramped into the same line as the verb, but every sentence earns its place.

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 three parameters at 0% schema coverage and an output schema present, the description needs to carry parameter and behavior meaning rather than return format, which it partly does. The unaddressed scope and relation_type parameters are the notable gap, since both materially change the result set and an agent cannot infer their semantics from the schema.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does so well for uri by enumerating the accepted URI forms and anchoring them to link_entities. However, the other two parameters — scope (default 'hybrid') and relation_type — receive no explanation at all, leaving a significant semantic gap for a filter that changes what is returned.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Query relations involving a specific entity URI.' An agent immediately knows this is a read of relations for one entity. It stops short of explicitly distinguishing itself from siblings such as link_entities or unlink_entities, which it only references for URI syntax rather than as alternatives.

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?

Usage is implied by 'the entity to look up' and by the note that a not-yet-linked entity returns nothing, which hints at when the tool is worth calling. There is no explicit when-not guidance and no statement of alternatives (e.g., that link_entities is the write counterpart), so an agent must infer the boundary itself.

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