mem0-mcp-selfhosted

list_entities

List users, agents, or runs that currently hold memories using Qdrant Facet API with scroll and deduplication fallback.

Instructions

List which users/agents/runs currently hold memories.

Uses Qdrant Facet API (v1.12+) for server-side aggregation, with scroll+dedupe fallback for older versions.

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": "list_entities"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.0.0Jul 9, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description provides some behavioral context: it uses server-side aggregation with fallback for older versions. However, it doesn't disclose read-only nature, performance implications, or what 'holds memories' entails.

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 concise (two sentences) and front-loads the primary purpose. The technical detail about Qdrant is somewhat jargon-heavy but not excessive. No wasted sentences.

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?

Given no parameters and an output schema exists, the description is adequate but lacks context about what 'holds memories' means, the scope of the list, or any constraints. It could be more complete for a tool with many siblings.

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?

The schema has no parameters and 100% coverage trivially, so baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter information beyond the schema, which is acceptable since there are no parameters.

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 clearly states the tool lists which users/agents/runs hold memories. It uses a specific verb and resource, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling list tools like get_memories or search_memories.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description mentions implementation details (Qdrant API) but doesn't help the agent decide when to invoke list_entities over other list/search tools.

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

Deploy Server