Skip to main content
Glama
alopez3006

snipara-mcp

by alopez3006

rlm_memories

Retrieve memories with filters for type, scope, category, status, text search, and sorting by date or usage.

Instructions

List memories with optional filters and sorting.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeNo
scopeNo
agent_idNoRequired when scope=agent; limits listing to one agent namespace
external_user_idNoIntegrator client keys only: stable end-user ID for scope=user memory listing. Snipara hashes and namespaces it per integrator client.
categoryNo
statusNoFilter by lifecycle status
searchNoText search in content
limitNo
offsetNo
include_inactiveNoInclude inactive memories in results
sort_byNoField to sort bycreated_at
sort_orderNoSort directiondesc
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, rate limits, or side effects. Although listing is likely safe, this is not stated.

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?

A single sentence that is clear and front-loaded. However, it could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With 12 parameters and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It omits details on pagination (limit/offset), return format, and how optional filters combine.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 58%, but the description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what is in the schema. For undocumented parameters like 'category', the description does not compensate.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states it lists memories with optional filters and sorting. It uses specific verb 'list' and resource 'memories', distinguishing it from write-oriented memory tools among siblings.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like rlm_recall, rlm_search, or other memory listing tools. The absence of usage context forces the agent to guess.

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/alopez3006/snipara-mcp'

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