Skip to main content
Glama
NguyenSen

cc-mem-mcp

by NguyenSen
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Related Servers

Alternatives to cc-mem-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • semantic-memory

      GFYURI
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Persistent memory with semantic search for Claude and MCP-compatible clients, storing context that survives conversations and can be retrieved intelligently.
      1
      MIT

    • mcp-light-memory

      PeterPirog
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Local-first persistent memory for coding agents and MCP clients. It keeps important project context across sessions and reduces wasted tokens by retrieving only relevant memories instead of replaying unnecessary history.
      8
      MIT
    • Unforget MCP Server by unforget-ai

      Unforget MCP Serverofficial

      unforget-ai
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Long-term memory for Claude Code, Cursor, and MCP clients with zero-config embedded PostgreSQL. Stores and retrieves facts, preferences, and decisions using 4-channel semantic, BM25, entity, and temporal search with cross-encoder reranking.
      1
      Apache 2.0

    • KOPENG

      djy89
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Persistent, self-curating memory for coding agents. It enables local, zero-cost context recall through MCP tools with hybrid retrieval and autonomous consolidation.
      -
    Deploy Server
    Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

    TDQS

    A4.2/5.0

    Scored across 7 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: categories listing, deletion, semantic search, bulk ingestion from disk, initialization of project memory, stats reporting, and single-fact storage. No overlap between them.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    All tools follow the 'memory_' prefix. Most use verb forms (delete, find, ingest, init, store) but two use nouns (categories, stats). The pattern is mostly consistent with minor deviation.

    Tool Count5/5

    With 7 tools covering initialization, ingestion, storage, retrieval, deletion, categories, and statistics, the count is well-scoped for a memory management server. Each tool earns its place.

    Completeness4/5

    Core CRUD operations are covered (store, find, delete) along with initialization and bulk ingestion. Minor gaps like an explicit update or listing all facts are missing but can be worked around.

    Maintenance

    ActivityInactive
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources