Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
GitMem

GitMem

Official
by gitmem-dev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

health

Check write health for the current session. Reports success or failure rates for tracked fire-and-forget operations to diagnose silent failures.

Instructions

Show write health for the current session. Reports success/failure rates for all tracked fire-and-forget operations (metrics, cache, triple writes, embeddings, scar usage). Use this to diagnose silent failures.

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": "health"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
failure_limitNoMax number of recent failures to return (default: 10)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.6.4

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided; description implies read-only health check but does not explicitly confirm no side effects or disclose any behavioral traits beyond reporting rates.

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 sentences with no waste. Purpose is stated first, followed by use case. Every sentence adds value.

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 simple health check with one optional parameter, the description adequately explains purpose and usage. It does not describe return format, but no output schema is expected.

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 description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter description of 'failure_limit'. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool shows write health for the current session, listing specific tracked operations. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'gitmem-cache-health' by focusing on session-level write health.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly says 'Use this to diagnose silent failures', providing clear context for when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or compare with alternatives.

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