Skip to main content
Glama
carloshpdoc

memorydetective

Analyze HTTP / connection activity from a Network trace

analyzeNetworkActivity

Parses network connections from a .trace file to identify slow requests and data-heavy calls, ranking by duration and bytes for performance analysis.

Instructions

[mg.trace] Parse the network-connections schema from a .trace recorded with a Network template. Returns per-request URL/host, method, status code, response time, bytes in/out. Top-N rankings by duration (which calls blocked the user) and by bytes (which calls bloat the budget) plus per-host aggregates surfacing chatty SDKs. v1.14+.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tracePathYesAbsolute path to a `.trace` bundle recorded with a Network template (`xcrun xctrace record --template 'Network Profile' --attach <app|pid>`).
topNNoReturn the top N rows for each ranking dimension (by-duration + by-bytes). Default 10.
minBytesNoFilter out connections that transferred fewer than this many bytes (in + out combined). Useful for cutting tiny pings out of the by-bytes view.
outputFormatNoResponse format. Omitted or `json` (default, preserves v1.8 behavior) returns JSON.stringify of the result. `markdown` renders a human-readable view of the same data. `both` returns both content items in one response, so a client can display markdown to the user and parse JSON for the agent loop without a second call. `verify-fix-table` (v1.10, applies to `analyzeAbandonedMemory` and `diffMemgraphs`) emits a focused 4-column markdown comparison table (Class | Before | After | Delta) of the actionable rows; other tools fall back to `markdown` for this value.
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It explains the tool parses a specific schema, returns per-request data and aggregates, and notes version requirements. This sets accurate expectations for the tool's operation.

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?

The description is a single paragraph but packs significant detail without redundancy. Each sentence contributes meaning, though it could be slightly more concise.

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?

Given no output schema, the description covers input requirements, processing, and output structure (per-request details, aggregates). It explains version constraints and parameter functions. However, it lacks differentiation from sibling tools.

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 provides full coverage (100%) and descriptions for all 4 parameters. The description adds context about the trace template and version (v1.14+), enhancing understanding beyond the schema alone.

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?

The description clearly states it parses network trace data, returns per-request details (URL, method, etc.), and provides top-N rankings and per-host aggregates. It specifically names the trace template and schema, distinguishing it from sibling tools.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies use when analyzing network activity from a trace, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus other analysis tools (e.g., analyzeTimeProfile). No when-not-to or alternative suggestions.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/carloshpdoc/memorydetective'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server