Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
openmem-mcp

openmem-mcp

by bcmyguest
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Read a knowledge page

memory_pages_read
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch one Hindsight knowledge page by page ID from a listing, search result, or [[page:]] link to inspect stored project memory.

Instructions

Read one knowledge page by id (from a page listing, search, or [[page:]] link). Hindsight only.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "page_id": "<page_id>"
    },
    "name": "memory_pages_read"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bankNoHindsight bank (use memory_project_scope for the project bank; default openmem-mcp)
page_idYesKnowledge page id (kp-…)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.8.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds the meaningful constraint that it works only against Hindsight, but says nothing about behavior on a missing/invalid id or what a page read returns.

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 compact clauses with no waste; the resource and identifier requirement are front-loaded, and the scope caveat trails as a short qualifier.

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?

For a two-parameter read-only fetch with rich annotations and no output schema, this covers what an agent needs to invoke it correctly. Only minor gaps remain, such as error behavior for an unknown page id.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented, but the description adds genuine value by explaining the provenance and expected shape of page_id (kp- ids obtained from listing, search, or wiki links). The 'Hindsight only' clause reinforces the bank parameter's scope constraint.

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 ('Read one knowledge page by id'), and 'one' implicitly contrasts with the list/search siblings. It does not name those siblings explicitly, but the scope is unambiguous and 'Hindsight only' bounds where it applies.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Tells the agent where a valid id comes from (page listing, search, or a [[page:<id>]] link), which implicitly routes enumeration/discovery to memory_pages_list and memory_pages_search. 'Hindsight only' excludes non-Hindsight backends. No explicit when-not statement, so not a 5.

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