Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Mirsad

Mirsad

by amkkoussay
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

memory_stats

Retrieve counts of stored entities, facts, decisions, and open conflicts to review the current state of your shared memory hub.

Instructions

Counts: entities, facts (total/current), decisions, open conflicts.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "memory_stats"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Counts' implies a non-mutating aggregation, and the enumerated items disclose what the response covers, but there is no statement about scope (global vs. workspace), cost, or whether it reflects live state.

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 terse line with zero filler, and the most important content (what is counted) is front-loaded. The colon-list style is efficient but reads like a stub rather than a complete sentence, which slightly under-specifies the action.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a zero-parameter, read-only aggregation with no output schema, the description covers what is counted, which is the core need. It omits any indication of scope or result shape, leaving an agent to discover the response structure by calling it.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 applies. The enumerated counts are the only semantics that matter and they are stated.

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 fragment 'Counts: entities, facts (total/current), decisions, open conflicts' names the exact resources tallied and even distinguishes total vs. current facts, which separates it from siblings like recall or timeline. It lacks an explicit verb phrase ('returns counts of...'), making it telegraphic, but the scope is unambiguous.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of when a sibling such as recall or open_conflicts would be preferable, and no stated preconditions. The only signal is implicit: an agent infers it should call this when it wants aggregate numbers, which is the minimum possible inference.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools