codemem

by kunickiaj

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Local

memory_get

Read-only

Retrieve a stored memory by its exact ID. Optional filters refine the lookup; a mismatch returns not_found.

Instructions

Fetch one memory by exact ID. Does not inherit the default project; optional filters constrain the lookup, and a mismatch returns not_found.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`kind`	No	Filter by memory kind
`project`	No	Filter by project scope (matches sessions.project)
`scope_id`	No	Filter by a single sharing domain scope_id
`memory_id`	Yes	Memory ID
`trust_bias`	No
`visibility`	No
`personal_first`	No
`ownership_scope`	No
`exclude_actor_ids`	No
`exclude_scope_ids`	No	Sharing domain scope_ids to exclude
`include_actor_ids`	No
`include_scope_ids`	No	Sharing domain scope_ids to include
`exclude_visibility`	No
`include_visibility`	No
`exclude_trust_states`	No
`include_trust_states`	No
`exclude_workspace_ids`	No
`include_workspace_ids`	No
`widen_shared_when_weak`	No
`exclude_workspace_kinds`	No
`include_workspace_kinds`	No
`widen_shared_min_personal_score`	No
`widen_shared_min_personal_results`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`kind`	Yes
`title`	Yes
`body_text`	Yes
`confidence`	No
`created_at`	No
`session_id`	No
`updated_at`	No
`metadata_json`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.44.2Sep 10, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "body_text": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "confidence": {
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "created_at": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+      "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "kind": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "metadata_json": {
+      "additionalProperties": {},
+      "propertyNames": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "session_id": {
+      "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+      "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "title": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "updated_at": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "id",
+    "kind",
+    "title",
+    "body_text"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With readOnlyHint=true already covering the safety profile, the description adds meaningful behavioral detail: it does not inherit the default project, optional filters constrain the lookup, and a mismatch returns not_found. These are non-obvious behaviors that an agent cannot derive from the annotations alone.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the core operation and immediately followed by the two most important behavioral constraints (default project behavior, not_found on mismatch). No filler or repetition of the input schema.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description covers the core invocation, the not_found outcome, and a key project-scoping gotcha, and an output schema exists so return values do not need explanation. Still, given the high parameter count and low schema coverage, an agent receives very little guidance on when or how to use the many filtering parameters. It is minimally viable but not complete.

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?

Schema description coverage is only 26%, so the description must compensate for the many undocumented parameters. It does not: it only says 'optional filters constrain the lookup' without explaining specific parameters like trust_bias, widen_shared_when_weak, personal_first, or the include/exclude filter families. Property names are partially self-explanatory, but the description provides almost no semantic help for the 23-parameter surface.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch one memory by exact ID.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling search/recent tools that perform broader lookups, and the exact-ID emphasis makes its narrow purpose unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage context – an agent should call this when it has a specific memory ID – and it provides a useful caveat about not inheriting the default project. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over memory_search, memory_get_observations, or other siblings, nor does it give exclusion criteria. Usage guidance is implied rather than stated.

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

Deploy Server