PseudoLife-MCP

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

memory_store

Destructive

Store durable facts, decisions, or observations as persistent memories for later recall, one claim per call; duplicates drop and volatile values can be flagged for re-verification.

Instructions

Store one durable fact, decision, or observation. Use proactively for anything worth keeping — one claim per call, and decide which kind it is: PERSIST what stays true and will be wanted back; leave task-scoped detail in CONTEXT ONLY; RE-VERIFY a fast-changing value at its source, parking it with memory_fact_set(..., freshness_class="volatile") rather than persisting a stale one; ASK when the claim is ambiguous instead of persisting the guess. Near-duplicates are dropped, not erred (stored=False, reason="below_surprise_threshold"). For canonical NOW use memory_fact_set.

Returns: {stored, surprise, reason, cortex_promoted}.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`tags`	No	Optional labels, e.g. ["decision", "blocker"].
`text`	Yes	The claim to remember.
`origin`	No	Who asserted the claim.
`source`	No	Stable per-project/topic tag for later filtering; "status" for in-flight progress notes (peers see those; the dream skips them).	agent
`episode`	No	Episode handle for attribution.
`authority`	No	Speech act: "directive" (an instruction to you) / "quoted" (a doc or third party said it) / "observation"; "auto" infers.	auto
`distortion_tolerance`	No	"constraint" = must survive verbatim, pinned in recall; "auto" infers only that.	auto

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.18.1Oct 14, 2026

addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```

changedInput schema / properties / source / description

Previous value: -"Stable per-project/topic tag for later filtering."New value: +"Stable per-project/topic tag for later filtering; \"status\" for in-flight progress notes (peers see those; the dream skips them)."

Changed7 schema fields changedv0.15.0Sep 3, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / authority

Added value: +{
+  "default": "auto",
+  "description": "Speech act: \"directive\" (an instruction to you) / \"quoted\" (a doc or third party said it) / \"observation\"; \"auto\" infers.",
+  "enum": [
+    "auto",
+    "directive",
+    "observation",
+    "quoted"
+  ],
+  "title": "Authority",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / distortion_tolerance

Added value: +{
+  "default": "auto",
+  "description": "\"constraint\" = must survive verbatim, pinned in recall; \"auto\" infers only that.",
+  "enum": [
+    "auto",
+    "constraint",
+    "procedural",
+    "belief",
+    "preference",
+    "episodic"
+  ],
+  "title": "Distortion Tolerance",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / episode / description
```
Added value: +"Episode handle for attribution."
```
addedInput schema / properties / origin / description
```
Added value: +"Who asserted the claim."
```

addedInput schema / properties / source / description

Added value: +"Stable per-project/topic tag for later filtering."

addedInput schema / properties / tags / description

Added value: +"Optional labels, e.g. [\"decision\", \"blocker\"]."

addedInput schema / properties / text / description
```
Added value: +"The claim to remember."
```

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?

Adds real behavior beyond annotations: near-duplicates are silently dropped rather than errored, with stored=False and reason="below_surprise_threshold", and it sketches the return keys. Annotations (destructive=true, idempotent=false, openWorld=false) cover the write/safety profile, so this supplementary dedup semantics is the valuable addition.

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?

Front-loads the core action and the persist/context/verify routing before edge-case details. It is dense but mostly earns its length; the trailing 'Returns:' block partially duplicates the output schema.

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?

Given seven parameters, rich enums, and an existing output schema, the description supplies enough routing and dedup context for correct invocation. The explicit return-value listing is redundant against the output schema but not harmful.

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 100% and enums are self-documenting, so the schema already carries parameter meaning. The description adds only the general constraint of one claim per call and indirect framing of authority/freshness, without explaining tags, origin, source, or episode beyond what the schema already states.

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 (store one durable fact, decision, or observation) and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling memory_fact_set for canonical NOW values. An agent can identify the tool's role without opening the 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 explicit decision rules: PERSIST what stays true, leave task-scoped detail to CONTEXT ONLY, RE-VERIFY volatile values at source via memory_fact_set, and ASK when ambiguous. It also names the alternative tool for canonical now-values, so when/when-not is fully covered.

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