Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Helios

Helios

by brazaoo4
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

deprecate_memory

DestructiveIdempotent

Archive an obsolete active or stale memory by ID without deleting its audit history, marking it archived and excluding it from recall while keeping it inspectable.

Instructions

Archive an obsolete active or stale memory by ID without deleting its historical audit record. Transitions status to 'archived', sets the valid_to timestamp, logs the deprecation reason in the scope changelog, and updates Markdown exports. Archived records are excluded from recall_memories but remain permanently inspectable via recall_history. Use deprecate_memory when a fact or rule no longer applies and has no replacement; use save_memory instead to overwrite an outdated fact with a new value, or revalidate_memories if a [STALE] memory is still accurate.

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": {
      "memory_id": "<memory_id>"
    },
    "name": "deprecate_memory"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
reasonNoReason for deprecating the memory (e.g., 'replaced by microservice', 'obsolete config').
memory_idYesInteger ID of the active or stale memory to retire/archive.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.8.3

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true) by enumerating exact side effects: status set to 'archived', valid_to timestamp, reason logged to the scope changelog, Markdown exports updated. It also clarifies the post-state visibility model (excluded from recall_memories, still inspectable via recall_history), which resolves why destructiveHint is true despite the archive being non-destructive to history.

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?

Three sentences, each with a distinct job: what it does, what the resulting state means for retrieval, and how to choose between this and its alternatives. The most decision-critical information (archive-not-delete, alternative routing) is front-loaded.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described; the description instead covers the lifecycle effects and retrieval consequences an agent must know before mutating state. For a destructive, idempotent, 2-parameter mutation tool, nothing material is 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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented, but the description adds meaning: memory_id targets an 'active or stale' record (not already-archived), and reason is not merely stored but persisted into the scope changelog. It does not, however, say whether reason is required for auditing or whether it is optional in practice.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Opens with a specific verb+resource+scope: 'Archive an obsolete active or stale memory by ID without deleting its historical audit record.' The negative clause ('without deleting') immediately marks the boundary versus a delete tool, so the agent can distinguish it from save_memory or recall_history without inspecting schemas.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit selection rules: use deprecate_memory when a fact no longer applies and has no replacement; use save_memory to overwrite with a new value; use revalidate_memories if a [STALE] memory is still accurate. Both alternatives are named siblings and tied to a concrete condition.

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