Skip to main content
Glama

stats

Retrieve memory store statistics from the NeverOnce MCP server to monitor data usage and performance metrics.

Instructions

Get memory store statistics.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • The MCP tool registration and handler for 'stats'. It fetches stats from the memory object and formats the output string.
    @mcp.tool()
    def stats() -> str:
        """Get memory store statistics."""
        mem = _get_mem()
        s = mem.stats()
        return (
            f"Total memories: {s['total']}\n"
            f"Corrections: {s['corrections']}\n"
            f"Avg importance: {s['avg_importance']:.1f}\n"
            f"Avg effectiveness: {(s['avg_effectiveness'] or 0):.2f}"
        )
  • Memory class helper method that delegates the stats request to the database layer.
    def stats(self) -> dict:
        """Get memory store statistics."""
        return self.db.stats()
  • The actual database query implementation that retrieves statistics from the memories table.
    def stats(self) -> dict:
        row = self.conn.execute(
            """SELECT
                 COUNT(*) as total,
                 SUM(CASE WHEN memory_type='correction' THEN 1 ELSE 0 END) as corrections,
                 AVG(importance) as avg_importance,
                 AVG(effectiveness) as avg_effectiveness
               FROM memories"""
        ).fetchone()
        return dict(row)
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It reveals nothing about the nature of the statistics, potential performance characteristics of gathering them, or whether this operation is expensive. The only behavioral hint is 'Get' implying a read operation, but this is minimal.

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?

Extremely concise at four words in a single sentence. While not wasteful, it is arguably underspecified rather than appropriately minimal. However, the front-loading is correct and the sentence earns its place as a functional summary.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema (which handles return value documentation) and zero parameters, the description provides the minimum viable context for invocation. However, significant gaps remain regarding what specific statistics are monitored and the tool's relationship to the memory store lifecycle.

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?

Zero parameters exist in the input schema, which qualifies for the baseline score of 4 per the scoring rules. No additional semantic clarification is required or possible for non-existent parameters.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description states the basic action ('Get') and target ('memory store statistics'), but 'memory store' remains ambiguous (is this a cache, database, or specific service?) and does not specify what statistics are returned (count, size, usage?). It distinguishes poorly from siblings like 'recall' or 'check' which might also access the memory 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'recall' (likely for retrieving stored values) or 'check' (likely for validation). The description lacks any explicit when/when-not conditions or prerequisites.

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