Skip to main content
Glama
MyrikLD

Memlord

by MyrikLD
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

get_memory

Read-only

Fetch a single memory's full content by name. Use when you know the name; unlike search, it also returns expired memories.

Instructions

Fetch full content of a single memory by name.

Use only when you already know the name — e.g. after retrieve_memory() or recall_memory() which return names in their results alongside compact snippets. Do NOT use for search — use retrieve_memory() for semantic/text search or recall_memory() for time-based queries like 'last week'. Unlike search, this also returns expired memories (expires_at in the past) — check expires_at to tell; extend it via update_memory to bring one back.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
workspaceNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
tagsYes
contentYes
metadataNo
workspaceNo
created_atYes
expires_atNo
memory_typeYesfact: established fact about user, project, or system. preference: user's likes, dislikes, habits. instruction: persistent rule Claude must follow. feedback: evaluation of Claude's output. decision: a choice made with reasoning ('chose X over Y because Z'). insight: consolidated conclusion distilled from several existing memories.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.2.9
    • addedOutput schema / properties / expires_at
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ]
+}
    • changedOutput schema / properties / memory_type / description
      Previous value: -"fact: established fact about user, project, or system.\npreference: user's likes, dislikes, habits.\ninstruction: persistent rule Claude must follow.\nfeedback: evaluation of Claude's output.\ndecision: a choice made with reasoning ('chose X over Y because Z')."New value: +"fact: established fact about user, project, or system.\npreference: user's likes, dislikes, habits.\ninstruction: persistent rule Claude must follow.\nfeedback: evaluation of Claude's output.\ndecision: a choice made with reasoning ('chose X over Y because Z').\ninsight: consolidated conclusion distilled from several existing memories."
    • changedOutput schema / properties / memory_type / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "fact",
-  "preference",
-  "instruction",
-  "feedback",
-  "decision"
-]New value: +[
+  "fact",
+  "preference",
+  "instruction",
+  "feedback",
+  "decision",
+  "insight"
+]
  2. Added
  3. Removedv0.2.8
  4. Changed1 schema field changedv0.2.7
    • removedOutput schema / properties / created_at / format
      Removed value: -"date-time"
  5. First observedv0.2.4

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish the safe read profile (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false), but the description adds a genuinely non-obvious behavior: this lookup returns expired memories that search hides, and tells the agent how to detect (expires_at) and remedy (update_memory) that state. It does not cover permissions, pagination, or duplicate-name behavior, so it falls short of a 5.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Front-loaded with the core action, then usage, then exclusions in short scannable clauses. Every sentence carries actionable content — positive precondition, negative routing, and the expired-memory caveat — with no filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is unnecessary, and the description covers selection criteria, alternatives, and the expired-memory edge case. The only real gap is the unexplained 'workspace' parameter, which prevents a 5.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description carries the full burden, and it does clarify that 'name' is a memory identifier sourced from retrieve_memory/recall_memory results. However, the optional 'workspace' parameter is never mentioned in the description or the schema, leaving its scope and default semantics unexplained.

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 verb and resource ('Fetch full content of a single memory by name') and immediately contrasts itself with the two nearest siblings, retrieve_memory() and recall_memory(). An agent can distinguish this tool from search-style siblings 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 Guidelines5/5

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

Gives an explicit precondition ('Use only when you already know the name'), names where names come from ('after retrieve_memory() or recall_memory()'), and states an explicit when-not with the correct alternatives for both semantic/text search and time-based queries. Nothing is left to inference.

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