openmem-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Ingest status

memory_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check whether async memory ingestion has drained by reporting ready, active, and failed counts plus operation IDs before recalling just-stored content.

Instructions

Report whether async ingest has drained (ready, active and failed counts, memory_add operation ids). Check before recalling just-stored content. Hindsight only; mem0 is always ready.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "memory_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`bank`	No	Hindsight bank (use memory_project_scope for the project bank; default openmem-mcp)
`operation_ids`	No	Operation ids to check

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.8.0Oct 31, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent and non-destructive. The description adds real context beyond them: what the counts represent, that it reflects async ingest drain state, and that it applies only to Hindsight while mem0 is always ready.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and no filler. The parenthetical is densely compressed ('memory_add operation ids'), which is slightly ambiguous but earns its space.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by naming the return values (counts plus operation ids). For a 2-optional-param read tool with full annotation coverage, this is nearly complete; only pagination/limit behavior is unaddressed.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented, including the bank default and operation_ids. The description hints that operation ids tie to memory_add but adds no format or filtering detail beyond the schema – baseline 3.

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: report whether async ingest has drained, with the exact figures returned (ready, active, failed counts and operation ids). 'Hindsight only; mem0 is always ready' distinguishes it from the provider-status siblings, though it doesn't name them directly.

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?

'Check before recalling just-stored content' gives an explicit trigger condition tied to a sibling workflow (memory_recall). 'Hindsight only; mem0 is always ready' tells the agent when the tool is unnecessary, but no sibling tool is named as the alternative.

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