Skip to main content
Glama

recall

Search stored memories by query to retrieve relevant information from persistent agent memory across sessions.

Instructions

Search stored memories by query. Returns the most relevant memories.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesWhat to search for
namespaceNoOptional namespace to search within
limitNoMax results (default 10, max 50)

Implementation Reference

  • Handler logic for the 'recall' tool.
    case 'recall': {
      const qs = new URLSearchParams({ q: args.query });
      if (args.namespace) qs.set('namespace', args.namespace);
      if (args.limit) qs.set('limit', args.limit);
      result = await call('GET', `/memories/search?${qs}`);
      if (!result.results?.length) {
        return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: 'No memories found for that query.' }] };
      }
      const text = result.results.map((r, i) =>
        `[${i + 1}] (id: ${r.id})\n${r.content}`
      ).join('\n\n');
      return { content: [{ type: 'text', text }] };
    }
  • Input schema definition for the 'recall' tool.
    {
      name: 'recall',
      description: 'Search stored memories by query. Returns the most relevant memories.',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          query: { type: 'string', description: 'What to search for' },
          namespace: { type: 'string', description: 'Optional namespace to search within' },
          limit: { type: 'number', description: 'Max results (default 10, max 50)' },
        },
        required: ['query'],
      },
    },
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'most relevant' (indicating ranked results) but fails to confirm read-only safety, error handling when no matches exist, or the format/structure of returned memory objects.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description consists of two efficient sentences with zero redundancy. The first states the action and target, the second clarifies the return value. Every word earns its place and the key verb appears immediately.

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?

Given no output schema exists, the description minimally addresses return values ('Returns the most relevant memories') but lacks detail on memory structure or metadata. For a 3-parameter tool with simple types, this is adequate but leaves gaps in behavioral context due to missing annotations.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Input schema has 100% description coverage ('What to search for', 'Optional namespace', 'Max results'). The description reinforces the query parameter's role but does not add syntax details, validation rules, or semantic context beyond what the schema already provides, warranting the baseline score.

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 uses specific verb 'Search' with resource 'stored memories' and clarifies the retrieval is by 'query' returning 'most relevant' results. This distinguishes it from sibling 'list_memories' (which implies enumeration) by emphasizing relevance-based retrieval, though it could explicitly name the sibling contrast for full marks.

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?

The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus 'list_memories' (both retrieve memories) or prerequisites for searching. While 'by query' implies usage when searching for specific content, it fails to clarify selection criteria between the two retrieval siblings.

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/andrewpetecoleman-cloud/agentmemo-mcp'

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