Skip to main content
Glama

Update Memory

vault_update_memory
Idempotent

Append a dated, single-line entry to a memory file section, newest-first by default. Idempotent writes safely retry timed-out calls; missing files or sections are created automatically.

Instructions

Append a dated entry to a section of a About Me/ memory file. The server prefixes the date automatically ("- YYYY-MM-DD: entry text") and inserts newest-first by default. Idempotent — an exact duplicate (same date + text in the same section) is a no-op, so retrying a timed-out call is safe. Memory files are append-only by default: when a preference changes, append the new state (newest wins) rather than deleting the old one. A file may declare entry-policy: living in frontmatter (surfaced by vault_list_memory_files) — a current-state file where pruning expired entries is expected maintenance rather than a violation.

Example: vault_update_memory({ file: "Opinions", section: "Code patterns (newest first)", entry: "Prefer immutable data structures" })

When to use: Recording a new preference, principle, opinion, or fact about the user. Call vault_list_memory_files first and reuse existing file and section names so entries stay grouped. Prefer vault_write_note for creating non-memory notes. A missing file or section is created automatically (new sections get "(newest first)" appended; new files get a placeholder scope callout to fill in via vault_replace_in_note). A new section name that is nearly identical to an existing heading (an HTML-entity slip, typo, or spacing variation) is rejected instead of created, so a mistyped name cannot silently fragment the file — names differing only in digits (e.g. "2025" vs "2026") are treated as distinct.

Parameters:

  • options.date — ISO YYYY-MM-DD, defaults to today (server timezone).

  • options.position — "top" (default, newest-first) inserts above existing entries; "bottom" appends below them.

Obsidian syntax: Entry text is Obsidian Flavored Markdown. Watch for: #word = tag, [[ = wikilink. Escape with # or backticks when unintentional.

Errors:

  • "refusing memory write: … would shrink content" — safety guard for diverged on-disk content. Re-read with vault_get_memory before retrying.

  • "entry must be a single line" — memory entries are single dated bullets; collapse newlines or append multiple entries.

  • "section must be a single line" — section names become H2 headings; remove line breaks.

  • "date must be a real ISO calendar date" — options.date only accepts an existing calendar date in bare YYYY-MM-DD form (e.g. "2026-07-02"), not a timestamp.

  • "entry/section contains a control character" — entry or section includes a non-printable control byte; remove it before writing.

  • "section not created: … is nearly identical to existing section …" — near-duplicate guard; pass the exact existing heading (listed in the error) to append there, or choose a clearly different name for a genuinely new section.

Returns: Confirmation message (notes when an identical entry already existed and nothing was written).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fileYesMemory file name without .md (e.g. "Principles")
entryYesRaw entry text — a single line (newlines are rejected); the server prepends "- **YYYY-MM-DD**: " automatically. Do not include the date or bullet prefix.
optionsNoOptional date and position overrides
sectionYesH2 section heading (e.g. "Decision heuristics (newest first)"). Matched case-insensitively, with or without the "(newest first)" suffix.
Behavior5/5

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

Adds substantial behavior beyond annotations: idempotency ('an exact duplicate is a no-op'), append-only semantics ('newest wins' rather than deleting), auto date prefix, newest-first insertion, near-duplicate section guard, frontmatter 'entry-policy: living' behavior, and detailed error conditions. This is far more than the idempotentHint annotation alone.

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: summary, idempotency/append-only semantics, example, when-to-use, parameter explanations, syntax warnings, and error catalog. Each section serves a distinct purpose, though it could be tightened slightly without losing value.

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 (4 params with nested options, no output schema), the description is remarkably complete. It covers return behavior ('Confirmation message'), error strings and recovery actions, integration with vault_list_memory_files and vault_replace_in_note, and handling of divergent on-disk content. No critical gaps for an agent.

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?

While schema coverage is 100%, the description enriches parameters: explains date must be bare YYYY-MM-DD, position semantics ('top' inserts above existing entries), section heading matching behavior, entry must be single line without date/bullet prefix. It explains the why and edge cases beyond schema descriptions.

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 first sentence clearly states the action: 'Append a dated entry to a section of a About Me/ memory file.' It names the specific resource (memory file) and the verb (append), distinguishing it from sibling tools like vault_write_note (creating non-memory notes) and vault_get_memory (reading).

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?

Explicit 'When to use' section: 'Recording a new preference, principle, opinion, or fact about the user.' It instructs to call vault_list_memory_files first and reuse existing names, and directly states 'Prefer vault_write_note for creating non-memory notes.' This clearly guides tool selection.

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