PseudoLife-MCP

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

memory_fact_get

Look up the current fact value stored for a given entity and attribute. The response flags unresolved conflicts, empty slots, and facts that need re-verification.

Instructions

Look up the one CURRENT value at an (entity, attribute) slot. One value per slot. A null record means EMPTY, not unknown — memory_search still finds context. A set-valued slot returns {kind: "set", members, removed} instead — members: [] means EMPTY too.

Returns: {record | null, contenders} (+ entity_ref when the entity has a graph node). Non-empty contenders = unsettled conflict (see memory_fact_resolve); on an empty slot, candidates lists nearby slots — ranked leads, not answers. re_verify = a memory this fact was derived from has since been corrected; the value still stands but check it before acting. Set slots carry it too, at the slot. Its absence is not a guarantee: the flag is read from evidence that still exists, so it stops once the corrected memory is evicted or deleted.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`entity`	Yes	The slot's subject; the (entity, attribute) match is case- and separator-insensitive.
`attribute`	Yes	The slot's attribute.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.15.0Sep 3, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / attribute / description
```
Added value: +"The slot's attribute."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / entity / description
```
Added value: +"The slot's subject; the (entity, attribute) match is case- and separator-insensitive."
```
First observedv0.11.0Jul 31, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the behavioral burden. It reveals the meaning of null versus unknown, set-valued slot behavior, empty-set semantics, conflict signaling via contenders, the candidates field on empty slots, the re_verify flag, and its eviction/deletion limitation. This is unusually transparent and leaves little to guess.

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?

Although the description is long, it is densely packed with essential behaviors: value cardinality, null semantics, set handling, return fields, conflict resolution, and re_verify caveats. It front-loads the core purpose and spends every sentence on operationally relevant details. No filler is present.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

This is a nuanced tool with edge cases, and the description addresses all major ones: empty-vs-unknown, set-valued slots, unresolved conflicts, candidate leads, graph-node references, and the re_verify flag. Since an output schema exists, describing the full return shape is less critical, but the description still adds valuable semantic context about what each flag means in practice.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by clarifying that entity and attribute jointly define a slot with exactly one current value, and that attribute types (scalar vs set) change the returned shape. This is useful enrichment rather than repetition of the schema.

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?

The description states a specific action (look up the one CURRENT value) and a specific resource ((entity, attribute) slot). It clearly distinguishes this from memory_search by explaining that a null record means EMPTY, not unknown, and that memory_search still finds context. This is far beyond a vague purpose.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives clear context for when this tool is appropriate: retrieving the current value at a slot. It points to memory_search for continued context on empty slots and to memory_fact_resolve for unsettled conflicts. It stops short of an explicit exclusion list or a direct 'use X instead' statement for a sibling like memory_get, but the guidance is largely present.

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