Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Cortex-MCP

Cortex-MCP

by codesphere-u
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

memory_time_travel

Query the knowledge graph as of a specific ISO-8601 timestamp to inspect historical architecture state and trace how system design changed over time.

Instructions

Query the knowledge graph as of a specific ISO-8601 timestamp to inspect historical architecture state.

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": {
      "as_of": "<as_of>"
    },
    "name": "memory_time_travel"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
as_ofYesISO-8601 UTC timestamp to inspect.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden; it does imply a read-only point-in-time snapshot, which is useful context beyond the schema. It leaves open important behavior: what happens for timestamps before graph inception or in the future, whether the snapshot includes deletions/tombstones, and whether the query is expensive or rate-limited.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with the temporal qualifier immediately following. No filler or redundant phrasing.

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?

For a single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the definition states purpose, temporal semantics, and the intent (historical architecture inspection), which is nearly sufficient. The remaining gap is edge-case behavior at boundary timestamps, which is minor for a tool of this complexity.

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% and the single parameter is fully documented there ("ISO-8601 UTC timestamp to inspect"). The description restates the same semantics without adding format examples, timezone handling details, or boundary behavior, so it sits at the baseline for a fully covered schema.

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?

The description names a specific verb ("Query") and resource ("knowledge graph") plus a clear temporal scope ("as of a specific ISO-8601 timestamp"), so the agent knows exactly what this does. It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like memory_query_entity, so the differentiation is only implicit.

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?

Usage is implied by "to inspect historical architecture state" – an agent can infer this is the tool for point-in-time/retrospective reads. However, there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no exclusion (e.g. don't use for current state), and no named alternative such as memory_query_entity for live data.

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