Skip to main content
Glama

amber_search_memories

Find active memories by asking natural-language questions. Results ranked by relevance, with optional metadata and topic filtering.

Instructions

Find active memories by semantic meaning. Write the query as a natural-language question or description, NOT as keywords. Good: "What are the user's dietary preferences?", "meetings the user had last week". Bad: "diet food preferences", "meeting notes". The query is automatically expanded with synonyms and related terms to improve recall. Supports optional metadata filtering (e.g. { "user_tag": "work" }). Results are ordered by relevance (higher score = better match). Scores are only meaningful for ranking within a single query, not across different queries. Use amber_list_memories for chronological browsing. Optional topics param: pass topic names (like when storing) to filter by topic — matched semantically, so "beliefs" also finds memories tagged with "opinions" or "superstitions". Results from closely matching topics rank higher than fuzzy matches. Content is truncated to 1000 chars in search results — use amber_get_memory for full content. Rate-limited (drip bucket: 5000 capacity, refills ~1 token per 17 seconds).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesNatural-language question or description of what to find. Use full sentences, not keywords.
n_resultsNoMaximum number of results to return (default 10, max 100).
metadata_filterNoOptional metadata filter. Matches memories whose metadata contains every key-value pair given.
topicsNoOptional topic filter. Pass category names like 'food', 'work', 'beliefs'. Matched semantically — 'beliefs' also finds memories categorized under related topics like 'opinions' or 'superstitions'.
Behavior5/5

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

Despite no annotations, the description comprehensively discloses behavioral traits: automatic query expansion with synonyms, optional metadata filtering, relevance ordering with score meaning, content truncation to 1000 chars, and rate-limiting details (drip bucket capacity and refill rate).

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 structured with key points front-loaded (purpose and query style) and subsequent details on filtering and limitations. While informative, it is slightly lengthy but each sentence contributes value, earning a 4.

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, the description explains return values (relevance score, truncation) and covers search behavior, filtering, and limitations thoroughly. It addresses rate limiting and refers to amber_get_memory for full content, making it complete for the tool's context.

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?

The description adds significant meaning beyond the schema: clarifies that query should be natural language, explains topics semantic matching and ranking, notes metadata_filter matches all key-value pairs, and gives defaults for n_results. Schema coverage is 100%, but the description enriches understanding.

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 'Find active memories by semantic meaning' and distinguishes from siblings like amber_list_memories and amber_get_memory. It specifies the tool is for semantic search rather than chronological browsing or full content retrieval.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides explicit guidance on query formulation: use natural language, not keywords. It also suggests an alternative tool (amber_list_memories) for chronological browsing. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list other exclusions.

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/ambermem/amber'

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