Skip to main content
Glama

Metis · Memory Curator — Remember

remember

Save important findings, concepts, or workflows to memory with automatic classification and configurable scope visibility. Retrieve via recall().

Instructions

Store something in memory with automatic classification and scope tagging.

The unified write interface to Metis's memory system. Classifies the content
into the appropriate memory layer and stores it with scope tags for later
retrieval via recall().

Memory types:
  - 'episodic': A time-stamped event (something that happened)
  - 'semantic': A distilled concept or definition (timeless knowledge)
  - 'procedural': A workflow or how-to pattern
  - 'note': A human-curated memory palace entry (saved to DB + markdown)
  - 'auto': Let Metis classify based on content (default)

Scope tags determine visibility:
  - scope='global': Visible to all agents and projects
  - scope='agent': Visible only when agent_id matches
  - scope='project': Visible only when project_id matches
  - scope='session': Visible only in this session

Args:
    content: The text to remember. Can be a finding, concept, workflow,
        decision, or any text worth preserving.
    memory_type: How to classify this memory. One of 'episodic', 'semantic',
        'procedural', 'note', or 'auto' (default — Metis decides).
    agent_id: Tag this memory as belonging to a specific agent (e.g. 'librarian').
    project_id: Tag this memory as belonging to a specific project.
    scope: Visibility scope: 'global' (default), 'agent', 'project', or 'session'.
    title: Optional short title. Auto-generated from content if empty.
    tags: Comma-separated topic tags (e.g. 'hat,diagnostics,rdts').
    session_id: Current pipeline session ID (optional).

Returns:
    Confirmation of what was stored, in which layer, with what scope.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tagsNo
scopeNoglobal
titleNo
contentYes
agent_idNo
project_idNo
session_idNo
memory_typeNoauto

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It transparently explains that content is classified into layers, stored with scope tags, and returns a confirmation message. It covers auto-classification and default behaviors, but lacks details on potential side effects or authorization requirements.

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?

The description is well-structured with sections for memory types and scope tags, making it easy to scan. It is slightly verbose but every sentence adds value. The main purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (8 parameters, no annotations, existing output schema), the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, parameter details, memory classification, scope rules, and return value. It leaves no critical gaps.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must fully document parameters. It explains all 8 parameters, including their types, defaults, and purposes. For example, it lists memory types with examples, scope options with visibility rules, and mentions auto-generated titles and comma-separated tags.

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 clearly states it stores content in memory with automatic classification and scope tagging. It uses specific verbs ('store', 'classify', 'tag') and distinguishes itself from retrieval tools like `recall()` by being 'the unified write interface to Metis's memory system'.

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 provides clear guidance on when to use this tool (to store memories) and implicitly distinguishes from alternatives like `recall()` for retrieval. It details memory types and scope tags, helping the agent choose appropriate parameters. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/SVerITG/Metis'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server