GoodMemory

goodmemory_stats

Check memory counts and retrieval status to verify whether any memory exists before assuming an empty store.

Instructions

Diagnostic. Record counts and runtime metadata (embedding/retrieval status via the retrieval field) for the current GoodMemory scope. Call it to check whether memory exists here before assuming an empty store.

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": "goodmemory_stats"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cwd`	No	Workspace root. Defaults to the current working directory.
`sessionId`	No	Optional host session id for session-scoped recall.
`includeRuntime`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.5.1Jul 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Since no annotations exist, the description carries the full burden. It correctly indicates read-only diagnostics and mentions the 'retrieval' field, hinting at the return structure. No side effects are described, but for a stats tool this is acceptable.

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 plus a usage hint. Front-loaded with 'Diagnostic'. No wasted words; 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?

Given 3 optional parameters and no output schema, the description provides core purpose and usage context. It could elaborate on the output structure beyond the 'retrieval' field, but is sufficient for a simple stats tool.

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 67% (2 of 3 parameters described). The description does not add meaning beyond the schema for parameters; it focuses on the return field 'retrieval'. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema covers most parameters.

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?

The description clearly states 'Diagnostic. Record counts and runtime metadata...' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on diagnostic stats rather than content retrieval or search.

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 guides when to use: 'Call it to check whether memory exists here before assuming an empty store.' Does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the diagnostic nature implies it's for quick status checks.

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

Deploy Server