rag-rat

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

memory_validate

Re-anchors repository memories to current source, categorizing each as current, relocated, stale, gone, or pending. Runs automatically post-indexing.

Instructions

Re-anchor every repo memory against current source and mark each current / relocated / stale / gone / pending. Runs automatically after indexing.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "memory_validate"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.9.0-3b4b4b7Jun 25, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions re-anchoring and marking, but does not disclose side effects, destructive nature, permissions, or idempotency. Minimal behavioral context.

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?

Two concise sentences, each adding value: first explains action and categories, second gives timing. No wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Lacks details on output schema and meaningful descriptions of the status categories. With no annotations, more context on side effects and return values would improve completeness.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100% trivially. Description adds no parameter details, but baseline for no parameters is 4.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 're-anchor' and 'mark', the resource 'repo memory', and the outcome (current/relocated/stale/gone/pending). It distinguishes from sibling tools like memory_create or memory_update.

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?

Description implies it runs automatically after indexing, but does not explicitly state when a user should invoke it manually or provide alternatives. No guidance on when-not-to-use.

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