Skip to main content
Glama

memory_ingest

Ingest large documents by automatically chunking, embedding, and storing content with provenance for structured memory retrieval.

Instructions

Ingest a full document: automatically chunks it based on content type (text, markdown, code, legal), embeds each chunk, and stores with provenance. Use this for large documents.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contentYesFull document content to ingest
titleNoDocument title
sourceNoOrigin of the content (e.g., file path, URL, system name)
document_typeNoType of document (e.g., contract, policy, code, incident, decision)
scopeNoMemory scope for isolationglobal
namespaceNoNamespace within scope (e.g., project name, team name)
departmentNoDepartment (e.g., legal, engineering, hr, sales, finance)
authorNoWho created this content
access_levelNoAccess classification level
tagsNoTags for categorization
metadataNoDomain-specific metadata (e.g., {contract_type: 'NDA', parties: ['A','B']})
content_typeNoContent type determines chunking strategytext
chunk_sizeNoTarget chunk size in characters (~4 chars per token)
chunk_overlapNoOverlap between chunks in characters for context preservation
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations provide minimal behavioral hints (only openWorldHint=false). Description adds important details: automatic chunking by content type, embedding, and provenance storage. No contradiction.

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?

Two efficient sentences: first defines core behavior, second adds usage context. No redundancy.

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?

Covers ingestion flow and usage context but omits what is returned (e.g., success confirmation, document IDs). Lacks expected output details.

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 covers all 14 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond what schema provides.

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?

Specifically describes ingesting a full document with automatic chunking, embedding, and provenance storage. Clearly differentiates from sibling memory tools that handle smaller operations.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

States 'Use this for large documents' but does not explicitly exclude other scenarios or mention alternative tools for smaller documents. Lacks when-not-to-use guidance.

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/YonasValentin/mcp-memory-graph'

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