Skip to main content
Glama
ragflow-kb-mcp
by feci

ragflow_update_memory

Update memory settings by changing only the fields you provide, such as name, size, permissions, prompts, or model. Use it to adjust an existing RAGFlow memory without overwriting unspecified options.

Instructions

Update memory settings. Only the fields you pass change.

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": {
      "memory_id": "<memory_id>"
    },
    "name": "ragflow_update_memory"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
avatarNoAvatar image as base64
llm_idNoChat model as model_name@factory
memory_idYesMemory ID
descriptionNo
memory_sizeNoSize limit in bytes (max 5 MiB)
permissionsNoWho may manage the memory
temperatureNo
user_promptNo
memory_typesNoOnly allowed while the memory has no messages
system_promptNoExtraction prompt; keep its OUTPUT REQUIREMENTS and FORMAT parts
embedding_modelNoOnly allowed while the memory has no messages
forgetting_policyNoWhat to evict when the memory is full

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.1

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The PATCH-semantics sentence is real added value beyond the annotations: it reassures the agent that untouched fields survive the call, reinforcing destructiveHint=false. However, the description says nothing about the conditional restrictions (memory_types and embedding_model are only settable while the memory has no messages) or about permissions/ownership needed to mutate a memory.

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 short sentences, no redundancy, with the partial-update rule front-loaded. Nothing could be removed without losing meaning.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a 13-parameter mutation tool with conditional field restrictions and ownership implications, a two-sentence description is thin. An output schema and annotations exist, so return values and safety need not be restated, but the description omits the conditions under which certain updates are rejected, which is the main way an agent could call this tool incorrectly.

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?

With 13 parameters and roughly 69% schema description coverage, several fields (name, description, temperature, user_prompt, forgetting_policy) carry little or no documentation in either place. The description contributes only the generic partial-update framing and clarifies none of the individual field semantics, so it does not compensate for the remaining coverage gap.

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 (update) and resource (memory settings), which cleanly separates it from ragflow_get_memory_config, ragflow_create_memory, and ragflow_delete_memory by verb alone. It stops short of explicitly routing away from any sibling, so it is clear but not differentiating.

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?

'Only the fields you pass change' tells the agent that this is a partial rather than full replacement update, but there is no statement of when to prefer this over ragflow_create_memory or ragflow_get_memory_config, nor any prerequisites such as needing an existing memory_id.

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