Skip to main content
Glama

Update Memory

vault_update_memory
Destructive

Append a dated entry to a memory file section to record preferences, principles, or facts. Entries are inserted newest-first by default and date is added automatically.

Instructions

Append a dated entry to a section of a About Me/ memory file. The server prefixes the date automatically (format: "- YYYY-MM-DD: entry text") and inserts newest-first by default. Pass raw entry text without a date prefix.

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.

Behavior: Additive — existing entries are never overwritten, and repeat calls add duplicate entries. A missing file or section is created automatically; if the section name omits "(newest first)" the server appends it ("Design preferences" becomes "Design preferences (newest first)") — use that full name in later calls.

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 renders as Obsidian Flavored Markdown. Watch for: #word = tag, [[ = wikilink. Escape with backslash or backticks when unintentional.

Returns: Confirmation message.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fileYesMemory file name without .md (e.g. "Principles")
sectionYesH2 section heading (e.g. "Decision heuristics (newest first)")
entryYesEntry text (no date prefix)
optionsNoOptional date and position overrides
Behavior1/5

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

Description claims additive behavior (never overwrites entries), but annotations set destructiveHint=true, indicating potential data destruction. This contradictions undermines transparency. Without the contradiction, the description would provide good behavioral context, but the contradiction warrants a score of 1 per rules.

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?

Description is well-structured with clear sections (example, when to use, behavior, parameter details, syntax note). It is slightly verbose but each part serves a purpose. Front-loaded with critical information.

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?

For a tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: behavior (additive, auto-create, auto-rename), when to use, parameter defaults, Obsidian syntax considerations, and return value. No gaps identified.

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%, but the description adds significant value beyond schema: explains date prefix format, default date, position effects, and Obsidian syntax escaping. This extra context clearly aids correct usage.

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 appends a dated entry to a memory file section and distinguishes it from vault_write_note, which is for non-memory notes. It uses specific verbs and resources, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 (recording preferences/principles) and when not to (use vault_write_note for non-memory). Advises calling vault_list_memory_files first to reuse existing file/section names, providing clear guidance on alternative tools.

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