Skip to main content
Glama

recall

Search and retrieve relevant memories from the NeverOnce server, prioritizing corrections to ensure accurate information access.

Instructions

Search memories by relevance. Corrections surface first.

Args:
    query: What to search for.
    limit: Max results to return.
    namespace: Filter by namespace.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYes
limitNo
namespaceNodefault

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • The 'recall' MCP tool definition and handler implementation. It uses the Memory store to fetch relevant memories and formats them for the user.
    @mcp.tool()
    def recall(query: str, limit: int = 10, namespace: str = "default") -> str:
        """Search memories by relevance. Corrections surface first.
    
        Args:
            query: What to search for.
            limit: Max results to return.
            namespace: Filter by namespace.
        """
        mem = _get_mem()
        results = mem.recall(query, limit=limit, namespace=namespace)
        if not results:
            return "No memories found."
    
        lines = []
        for r in results:
            marker = " [CORRECTION]" if r["memory_type"] == "correction" else ""
            tags = json.loads(r["tags"]) if isinstance(r["tags"], str) else r["tags"]
            tag_str = f" ({', '.join(tags)})" if tags else ""
            lines.append(
                f"#{r['id']}{marker} [importance:{r['importance']}]{tag_str}\n"
                f"  {r['content']}"
            )
        return "\n\n".join(lines)
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It successfully discloses the 'Corrections surface first' ranking behavior, but omits other key behaviors like pagination details, relevance scoring methodology, namespace scoping rules, or whether this is read-only (implied but not stated).

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?

Well-structured with purpose front-loaded in two sentences, followed by necessary Args documentation (required due to schema deficiencies). No wasted words, though the Args block format is informal.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Adequate for a 3-parameter search tool with existing output schema. Covers basic search semantics, but gaps remain: namespace values/rationale and query syntax (e.g., supports wildcards?) are unspecified. Acceptable but not comprehensive.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates adequately by documenting all three parameters in the Args block. 'What to search for' and 'Max results' are clear, though 'Filter by namespace' is somewhat circular and could explain what namespaces represent.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States specific verb 'Search' and resource 'memories' clearly. 'Corrections surface first' adds distinctive behavioral detail that implicitly relates to the 'correct' sibling tool, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with all siblings like 'check' or 'store'.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

Lacks explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives. While 'Corrections surface first' hints at ranking behavior, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over siblings like 'check' (which likely verifies) or 'stats' (which likely summarizes).

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/WeberG619/neveronce'

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