PseudoLife-MCP

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

memory_history

Read an entity's past: get every version of a fact slot or a chronological chain of events, including writer, timestamps, and what changed. Pass as_of to see the state as of a specific time.

Instructions

Read an entity's past. SLOT mode (attribute given): every version of that canonical fact slot, oldest→newest, each with writer/session, tx/valid time, and age ("what did this used to be? who set it?") — compaction thins chains past ~30d. CHAIN mode (attribute omitted): the entity's dated fact/entry/edge/lesson events merged oldest→newest ("what led to X?").

Returns: {entity, attribute, count, versions} (slot mode) or {found, entity, count, events} (chain mode).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`as_of`	No	Slot mode only: ISO-8601 or epoch seconds; returns only versions written by then.
`entity`	Yes	The subject whose past to read.
`attribute`	No	The fact slot to read; omit for chain mode.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv0.15.0Sep 3, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / as_of / description

Added value: +"Slot mode only: ISO-8601 or epoch seconds; returns only versions written by then."

addedInput schema / properties / attribute / description

Added value: +"The fact slot to read; omit for chain mode."

addedInput schema / properties / entity / description
```
Added value: +"The subject whose past to read."
```

Changed1 schema field changedv0.14.0Aug 22, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / as_of

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "As Of"
+}

First observedv0.11.0Jul 31, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does well by stating it is a read operation, disclosing compaction behavior ('compaction thins chains past ~30d'), and describing the result contents and ordering. It does not mention auth, rate limits, or error behavior, but for a history read tool the key behavioral caveat (data loss via compaction) is clearly surfaced.

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?

The description is dense but well structured: a one-line summary, two clearly labeled modes with examples, and a concise return-format breakdown. The most important usage distinction is front-loaded, and every sentence contributes either mode semantics, ordering, or data-retention caveats.

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?

For a dual-mode read tool with a moderate parameter set and no annotations, the description is complete: it explains both modes, the as_of semantics are already in the schema, returns are specified, ordering is explicit, and the compaction caveat is disclosed. An agent has enough context to invoke this tool correctly and interpret its results.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the 'attribute' toggling behavior and explains the mode-dependent return object, but it does not add substantial meaning beyond what the schema already states for entity, attribute, and as_of. The extra context is mostly behavioral rather than parameter-specific.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource, 'Read an entity's past,' and then clearly differentiates the two modes (SLOT vs CHAIN) with concrete examples. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like memory_get or memory_search, which read current or searched facts rather than historical versions.

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 explicit mode-selection guidance: provide 'attribute' for SLOT mode and omit it for CHAIN mode, with a clear semantic purpose for each ('what did this used to be?' vs 'what led to X?'). It does not name sibling alternatives or state when not to use this tool, so it falls just short of a 5.

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