Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Helios

Helios

by brazaoo4
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

revalidate_memories

Idempotent

Restore stale memories to active status after confirming anchor-file changes did not invalidate them, clearing stale reasons and syncing Markdown exports; invalid or active IDs are skipped.

Instructions

Restore a batch of [STALE] memories back to 'active' status after verifying that changes to their anchor_files did not invalidate them. Clears stale_reason and stale_since for all valid stale IDs in memory_ids and syncs Markdown exports; non-existent or already-active IDs are safely skipped and reported without failing the batch. Use revalidate_memories only when the recorded fact remains accurate after a commit; use save_memory instead to supersede the fact if its value changed, or deprecate_memory if it was removed.

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_ids": "<memory_ids>"
    },
    "name": "revalidate_memories"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
memory_idsYesList of stale memory IDs to revalidate and mark back as 'active'.

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?

Annotations already declare non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered; the description goes further by disclosing the concrete side effects (clears stale_reason and stale_since, syncs Markdown exports) and the batch failure semantics (non-existent or already-active IDs are skipped and reported rather than failing the batch). These are behaviors an agent cannot infer from the annotations.

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, front-loaded with the action and state transition, followed by side effects and then the disambiguation rule. No filler and no repetition of the tool name or schema.

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 single-parameter batch mutation with an output schema already present, the description covers action, precondition, side effects, partial-failure behavior, and alternative tools. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly 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% and the single parameter is well documented, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real value beyond the schema by explaining that only 'valid stale IDs' in the list are acted on and that the rest are skipped and reported, which clarifies the array's tolerance for bad input.

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?

States a specific verb (restore/revalidate), a specific resource (a batch of [STALE] memories), and the exact state transition (stale -> 'active') along with the precondition (anchor_files verified unchanged). It also implicitly distinguishes itself from save_memory and deprecate_memory by naming them later, so an agent can identify the tool without opening the schema.

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?

Gives an explicit selection rule: use this only when the recorded fact remains accurate after a commit; use save_memory to supersede if the value changed; use deprecate_memory if it was removed. Both alternatives and the discriminating condition are stated outright.

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