Skip to main content
Glama

Memory Recall

vault_memory_recall
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve dated memory entries about any topic using hybrid keyword and semantic search, showing the full evolution of preferences, opinions, and facts across all memory files.

Instructions

Recall memory entries about a topic — entry-granular hybrid (keyword + semantic) retrieval across ALL About Me/ files and ALL time. Returns every relevant dated entry sorted oldest-first, so the full evolution of a preference, opinion, or fact is visible — semantic matching finds early entries even when their phrasing differs from the query. Tuned for recall over precision: expect some marginal entries and judge relevance yourself when synthesizing an answer. Content-word queries ("testing philosophy", "sustainable pacing") rank best; a meta-framed query ("opinions on testing") whose relevance cut would come back empty degrades to relaxed any-term keyword matching instead of returning nothing.

Example: vault_memory_recall({ query: "working hours and pacing" }) Example: vault_memory_recall({ query: "opinions on testing", file: "Opinions" })

When to use: Answering "what does my memory say about X?" or "how has my view on Y evolved?" — topic-based recall across memory files. Prefer vault_get_memory to read a known file or section verbatim; prefer vault_search for notes outside the memory layer.

Errors:

  • No matching entries returns { entries: [], total: 0 }, not an error

  • An unknown file returns empty results — call vault_list_memory_files to discover valid names

Returns: JSON { entries, total, truncated, search_mode, reranked }. Each entry is { file, section, date, text } — text is the raw entry markdown (wikilinks intact, continuation lines included); file and section feed directly into vault_get_memory or vault_delete_memory. entries ascend by date (oldest first). total counts all matched entries; truncated=true means max_results dropped the least-relevant matches — never a date range — so raise max_results or narrow the query for the complete set. search_mode is "hybrid" when vector matching contributed, "fts" when the entries came from keyword matching alone — including the any-term fallback that rescues a would-be-empty result; reranked is true when the cross-encoder relevance cut was applied.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fileNoOptional: restrict to one memory file, name without .md (e.g. "Opinions"). Omit for cross-file recall — the default and usual choice.
queryYesTopic to recall — natural language works best (semantic matching bridges phrasing drift across months); content words about the topic rank better than meta framing ("testing philosophy" over "opinions on testing")
max_resultsNoCap on returned entries (default 50). When more match, the least-relevant are dropped and truncated=true — never a date range.
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, but description adds detailed behavioral traits: returns entries sorted oldest-first, tuned for recall, degraded matching for meta queries, error handling (empty results, unknown file behavior), and explains output fields like truncated and search_mode.

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 long but well-structured with examples, error handling, and return format. Front-loaded with main purpose, but some details could be more concise. Still earns its length.

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 no output schema and 3 parameters, the description covers return format, behavior, edge cases, and examples completely. Annotations cover safety, leaving description to handle all necessary context.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, baseline 3. Description adds value by explaining natural language preference, content words vs meta framing for query, file parameter usage, and max_results default and behavior (drops least-relevant when truncated).

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 the tool recalls memory entries about a topic using hybrid retrieval across all memory files. It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning vault_get_memory for known file/section reading and vault_search for non-memory notes.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: for answering 'what does my memory say about X?' or evolution questions. Provides alternatives: vault_get_memory for reading known files, vault_search for notes outside memory.

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/aliasunder/vault-cortex'

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