Skip to main content
Glama

Open visualization

open_visualization
Read-onlyIdempotent

Launch an interactive neural graph of Cortex memory, methodology profiles, and knowledge graph in your browser for visual exploration, screenshots, or presenting state.

Instructions

Open the bundled Cortex visualization in the user's default browser — a force-directed neural graph combining methodology profiles, memory nodes, and the knowledge graph, plus the Wiki, Atlas, Emotion, Board, Pipeline, and Knowledge views. Starts the local HTTP server on 127.0.0.1:3458 if not already running and auto-shuts-down after 10 minutes of idle. Use this for visual exploration, screenshots, or presenting Cortex state. Distinct from get_methodology_graph (returns JSON for a CUSTOM client, no browser launched, no auxiliary views) and list_domains (text overview, no graph). Side effects: spawns an HTTP server process and opens a browser tab. The CALL itself returns in ~200 ms (server warmup + browser launch); the GRAPH build is lazy — kicked when the page polls /api/graph/progress (i.e. when the user opens the Graph view). First paint of the skeleton lands in ~1 s; the full graph fills in behind it and depends on the DB size (seconds for typical, ~1-3 min on a 100k+ memory store). Works WITHOUT Cortex too: when its PostgreSQL is unreachable (or CORTEX_VIZ_NO_DB=1 / --no-db is set) the server starts in no-DB mode — the Trace view is fully live from ~/.claude session logs + git, and the five DB-backed views (Graph, Brain, Knowledge, Wiki, Board) appear greyed out with an install pointer instead of erroring. Returns {url, message, dev_source, bootstrap, layout}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
viewNogalaxy
domainNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior5/5

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

The description goes far beyond the annotations by disclosing side effects (HTTP server process, browser tab, idle auto-shutdown), lazy graph build, performance timelines, and the no-DB degradation mode. It also states the returned fields and the nature of the call, all without contradicting the readOnly/openWorld/idempotent hints.

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 long but well-organized, front-loaded with the core purpose and then detailing side effects, performance, and fallback. While every sentence adds value, the length could be trimmed slightly without losing essential information.

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?

It covers purpose, usage context, side effects, performance characteristics, fallback behavior, and return value shape. Given the tool's complexity and the presence of an output schema, this description provides complete contextual coverage for an agent to select and invoke the tool confidently.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has 0% coverage (no parameter descriptions), and the description does not explain what `view` or `domain` expect. It mentions several visualization views (e.g., Wiki, Atlas, Graph) but never maps them to the `view` parameter values, and `domain` is entirely unaddressed. This is a clear gap for correct invocation.

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 the tool opens the bundled Cortex visualization in the user's default browser and enumerates the included views. It also explicitly distinguishes it from sibling tools `get_methodology_graph` and `list_domains`, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

It provides explicit usage guidance: 'Use this for visual exploration, screenshots, or presenting Cortex state.' It also names alternatives and contrasts them, and explains the no-DB fallback scenario, giving the agent clear conditions for when to use this tool.

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/cdeust/cortex-viz'

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