basic-memory

Schema Diff

schema_diff

Read-only

Detect drift between a note-type schema and actual note usage to find fields that no longer match. Specify the note type to compare defined entity fields with real notes.

Instructions

Detect drift between a schema definition and actual note usage. A schema is a note with type: schema whose entity field names the note type it describes.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`project`	No	Project name. Optional -- server will resolve.
`note_type`	Yes	The note type to check for drift (e.g., "person").
`project_id`	No	Project external_id (UUID). Prefer this over `project` when known — it routes to the exact project regardless of name collisions across cloud workspaces. Takes precedence over `project`. Get from list_memory_projects().
`output_format`	No		text

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.24.1Oct 23, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds domain context by explaining that a schema is a note with type: schema whose entity field names the described note type, but it does not clarify what counts as drift or how results are reported.

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?

Two short sentences with no waste. The purpose is front-loaded and the schema definition follows as necessary context.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Output schema and annotations cover return values and safety. The description explains the core schema concept needed to call the tool correctly. A minor gap remains around what specific drift conditions are detected, but the essential information is present.

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?

Schema coverage is 75%, so the schema documents most parameters. The description adds meaning to note_type by explaining the schema-note relationship, but it does not mention project/project_id precedence or the output_format parameter beyond what the schema already provides.

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: detect drift between a schema definition and actual note usage. It also defines what a schema note is, which makes the purpose concrete. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like schema_validate or schema_infer.

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 implies the tool is used for drift detection, but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no comparison to relevant siblings such as schema_validate or schema_infer.

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