Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Geniuz

Geniuz

by jackccrawford
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

folders

List memory stores, inspect a store’s purpose before writing, and create separate stores to keep memories apart.

Instructions

List the folders you can use: each is a separate store of memories with its own purpose. Check a folder's description before writing to it, since it may say what belongs there. Pass a name to read one folder's whole description. Pass create to make a new folder, when the person wants memories kept apart.

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": "folders"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
faceNoOptional, with name or create. One emoji shown beside the folder's name in the Geniuz window. A folder's own writer chooses it; an empty value clears it.
nameNoOptional. A folder's name or 8-character ID, to read it in full.
createNoOptional. The name of a new folder to create, such as Work.
filterNoOptional. A word from a folder's name or description. With many folders the list is a shortlist; this finds the others.
descriptionNoOptional, with create. What belongs in the folder, for whoever comes here next.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv5.0.11
    • addedInput schema / properties / face
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional, with name or create. One emoji shown beside the folder's name in the Geniuz window. A folder's own writer chooses it; an empty value clears it.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / filter
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional. A word from a folder's name or description. With many folders the list is a shortlist; this finds the others.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Addedv5.0.1

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It discloses the three modes and that a folder's description 'may say what belongs there,' which is useful context. But it says nothing about side effects of creation (name collisions, reversibility, permissions) or about the list's size/pagination, leaving meaningful gaps.

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 list purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by the read and create modes in order. Sentences are dense but each carries information. Slightly long and run-on, but no filler.

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 5-parameter, no-required, no-annotation tool with no output schema, the description covers all three modes and the pre-write check workflow, which is most of what an agent needs. Missing return-format hints (there is no output schema) and creation side effects are the main gaps.

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%, so the schema already documents all five parameters, including the mode combinations ('with name or create'). The description reinforces how 'name' and 'create' select modes but adds little about face, filter, or description beyond what the schema states. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 concrete verb and resource ('List the folders you can use') and explains that a folder is 'a separate store of memories with its own purpose.' It also covers the read-one and create modes, so an agent can tell what the tool does. It never names the siblings (keep/recall) to differentiate itself, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

It gives clear usage conditions per mode: pass a name to read one folder, pass create 'when the person wants memories kept apart,' and check a folder's description before writing. That is explicit when-to-use guidance. It lacks any when-not-to-use or named alternative, so it falls short of a 5.

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