Bilinc

List stored memories

list_memories

Read-onlyIdempotent

Browse stored memories in a Bilinc Cloud project, ordered by key, and filter by prefix, type, or update date to inspect agent knowledge and page results.

Instructions

List the memories stored in this Bilinc Cloud project, ordered by key.

    Read-only and free. Filters: key `prefix`, `memory_type`, and ISO-8601
    `updated_after` / `updated_before`. 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

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`limit`	No
`cursor`	No
`prefix`	No
`values`	No	preview
`memory_type`	No
`updated_after`	No
`updated_before`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv2.3.11Oct 17, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds real context beyond that: cost ('free'), page-size bound (1-100), value-sizing modes, and the pagination contract ('nextCursor is null on the last page'). It omits anything about rate limits or ordering guarantees beyond 'by key', but the added detail is substantive.

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 purpose, then filters, then return/pagination semantics in a compact block. Every sentence carries information; the only slight redundancy is restating read-only, which annotations already assert.

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 7-parameter, zero-coverage, paginated list tool, the description covers filtering, ordering, page sizing, value sizing, and the cursor contract. An output schema exists so return fields need not be spelled out, yet the description summarizes them anyway, leaving nothing essential missing.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden and largely does: it explains prefix, memory_type, ISO-8601 updated_after/updated_before, the limit range, and the meaning of the three 'values' modes. The 'cursor' parameter itself is only implied via the nextCursor explanation, which is a minor gap.

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') plus ordering ('ordered by key'), which is far more than a tautology. It does not, however, differentiate itself from the sibling 'recall' or 'history' tools, so an agent must infer which retrieval tool applies.

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?

The description enumerates the available filters and notes the tool is read-only and free, which implies the browse/filter use case. It never states when to prefer list_memories over recall, history, or diff, and gives no exclusions or prerequisites, leaving usage selection implicit.

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

Deploy Server