Store multiple memories in one batch call without enrichment. Compute embeddings in a single efficient pass for faster storage.
Store multiple memories in one call, directly without enrichment. Embeddings (if configured) are computed in a single batched call for efficiency.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| memories | Yes | Memories to store (at least 1). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses batch embedding computation and the lack of enrichment, but omits potential side effects, error handling, or atomicity. This is moderate transparency.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is concise at two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose. The second sentence adds relevant efficiency details without redundancy, making it well-structured.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple batch operation with a well-defined schema, the description covers the core behavior. It lacks explicit error-handling or partial-failure semantics, but these are not critical for basic usage, so it is largely complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema already provides full coverage of the 'memories' parameter and its nested properties. The description adds no extra semantic detail about parameters beyond what the schema states, so it remains at the baseline.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's purpose: to store multiple memories in one call. It distinguishes itself from the single-store sibling by explicitly mentioning batch behavior, making its function unambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage for batch storage but does not explicitly compare with alternatives like memory_store or memory_process. It mentions 'directly without enrichment' as a hint, but lacks explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over others.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
This server cannot be deployed