Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Bilinc

Bilinc

by atakanelik34
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

List stored memories

list_memories
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists stored memories in a Bilinc Cloud project with filters for key prefix, memory type, source, and update dates, returning paginated entries with preview or full values.

Instructions

List the memories stored in this Bilinc Cloud project.

    Read-only and free. Filters: key `prefix`, `memory_type`, ISO-8601
    `updated_after` / `updated_before`, and `sources` (exact "saved by"
    values). `order` is "key" (default), "newest" (most recently updated
    first) or "oldest"; pass the same order with a `cursor`. Returns up to `limit` entries
    (1-100) with key, type, importance, source, created and updated times,
    entry version, and a value whose size follows `values` ("preview" by
    default, "full", or "none"). `total` counts all matches; `nextCursor`
    is the `cursor` for the next page and is null on the last page.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
orderNo
cursorNo
prefixNo
valuesNopreview
sourcesNo
memory_typeNo
updated_afterNo
updated_beforeNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.6.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / order
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Order"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / sources
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Sources"
+}
  2. Addedv2.3.11

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds 'free', the paging contract (same `order` with a `cursor`, `nextCursor` null on the last page), and the `values` size modes ('preview' default, 'full', 'none'). That is real behavioral context beyond the structured fields, though it does not quantify result size or say whether paging under concurrent writes is stable.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose, then cost, then filters, then return/paging shape — a logical order with no filler sentences. It is dense and slightly run-on ('Returns up to `limit` entries ... and a value whose size follows `values`'), but every clause carries parameter or paging information that is otherwise undocumented.

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 9-parameter tool with 0% schema descriptions, the definition documents every parameter, the default for `order` and `values`, the limit range, and the full cursor loop. An output schema exists, yet the description still names the returned fields and the `total`/`nextCursor` semantics, which is exactly what an agent needs to page correctly.

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 0% — only titles and defaults — so the description carries the full burden, and it does: it explains `prefix`, `memory_type`, ISO-8601 `updated_after`/`updated_before`, `sources` as exact 'saved by' values, `order` values with 'key' default, `cursor` reuse rule, `limit` (1-100), and `values` modes. The only gap is that valid `memory_type` values are never enumerated (no enums in schema).

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the memories stored in this Bilinc Cloud project'), so an agent immediately knows this is an enumeration tool. However, it never distinguishes itself from the sibling `recall` (presumably retrieval/search) or `history`, so the boundary is left to inference.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage context is implied through the enumerated filters and the 'Read-only and free' note, which tells an agent this is the cheap path for browsing. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement and no routing advice to `recall` or `history` for search-style lookups.

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