codemem

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

memory_recent

Read-only

Retrieve recent coding session memories, newest first, filterable by project, memory kind, visibility, and sharing scope to find relevant context.

Instructions

Return recent memories, newest first.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`kind`	No	Filter by memory kind
`limit`	No	Max results
`project`	No	Filter by project scope (matches sessions.project)
`scope_id`	No	Filter by a single sharing domain scope_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
`items`	Yes

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": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "items": {
+      "items": {
+        "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"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "items"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 10, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=truecars, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds 'newest first' ordering, which is useful, but it does not disclose defaults, time-window semantics, filtering behavior, or pagination, leaving significant behavioral 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 description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It efficiently states the action and ordering, though it is so brief it edges toward under-specification rather than ideal conciseness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With 23 parameters and a complex filtering surface, a one-sentence description leaves much unsaid about intended usage. The presence of an output schema helps, but the description alone does not adequately orient the agent to the tool's full context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is very low (roughly 3 of 23 properties have descriptions), and the tool description adds no parameter meaning. Most parameters, including visibility, trust, workspace, and widening controls, are undocumented in both description and schema.

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 'Return recent memories, newest first' uses a specific verb and states the ordering behavior, making the core purpose clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like memory_search or memory_get, so it loses a point for lacking sibling contrast.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description implies usage for fetching recent memories but provides no guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives, nor any exclusions or context. No sibling tool comparisons or use-case nuances are given.

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

Deploy Server