Skip to main content
Glama
MyrikLD

Memlord

by MyrikLD
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

update_memory

Modify an existing memory by name, changing only supplied fields such as content, tags, metadata, type, new name, workspace, or expiry. Use it to correct, rename, or extend stored memories.

Instructions

Update an existing memory identified by name. Only provided fields are changed.

new_name: rename the memory to this name. workspace: disambiguate if the name exists in multiple workspaces. expires_at: set or extend the UTC expiry; omit to leave it unchanged.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
tagsNo
contentNo
metadataNo
new_nameNo
workspaceNo
expires_atNoSet or extend the UTC expiry. Omit to leave unchanged.
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.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
createdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.2.9
    • addedInput schema / properties / expires_at
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "format": "date-time",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Set or extend the UTC expiry. Omit to leave unchanged."
+}
    • changedInput 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."
    • changedInput 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. First observedv0.2.4

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations only declare idempotentHint=false and destructiveHint=false; the description usefully adds that unspecified fields are preserved, which is not in the annotations. It still omits what happens on name collision, whether renames are reversible, and why the call is non-idempotent, so it adds partial rather than rich behavioral context.

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?

Four short lines, front-loaded with the core action and then one line per non-obvious field. The per-field list is efficient, though the expires_at line is a verbatim restatement of the schema description and earns no new information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is unnecessary, and the partial-update rule is stated. For an 8-parameter mutation tool with non-idempotent behavior, the description is still thin on collision/rename semantics and on how content, tags, and metadata interact with existing values.

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 coverage is only 25%, so the description carries extra burden. It explains new_name, workspace, and expires_at, and duplicates the schema's expires_at wording, but says nothing about tags, content, or metadata — including whether they replace or merge with existing values, which is the most consequential ambiguity for a 8-parameter tool.

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 verb and resource ('Update an existing memory') and adds the partial-update semantic ('Only provided fields are changed'), which is a meaningful differentiator from store_memory or delete_memory. It does not, however, distinguish itself from move_memory, which appears to be the natural alternative for changing workspace.

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 through the field explanations: workspace is described as a disambiguator and expires_at as an extend-or-set action. There is no explicit when-to-use framing, and the workspace note potentially conflicts with the existence of move_memory, leaving the agent to infer which tool performs workspace changes.

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