Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
TokenSaver MCP

TokenSaver MCP

by pozii
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

cache_store

Store tool results in a persistent cache with configurable TTL, preventing redundant re-runs of expensive operations.

Instructions

Store a tool result in the persistent cache with a TTL. Prevents re-running the same expensive operation twice. Recommended: set key = make_cache_key(tool_name, args).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "key": "<key>",
      "value": "<value>"
    },
    "name": "cache_store"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYesCache key (use make_cache_key helper for deterministic keys).
valueYesResult to store (JSON string or plain text).
ttl_secondsNoHow long to keep (default 1 hour). Use 0 for no expiry.
namespaceNoLogical group (e.g. "web", "files", "default").default

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It discloses caching with TTL and purpose, but omits details like key conflict behavior, return value, persistence guarantees, or error handling. Lacks depth for a full behavioral model.

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 sentences, both relevant and front-loaded. No redundant or unnecessary text. Highly efficient.

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?

Covers main purpose and key recommendation. Output schema exists but description doesn't mention return value, nor does it address edge cases (e.g., overwriting existing keys). Adequate for a caching tool but could be more complete.

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

Parameters4/5

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

With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3. The description adds value by recommending the make_cache_key helper for the key parameter, which clarifies intended usage beyond the schema's generic description.

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 the tool caches tool results with TTL and prevents re-running expensive operations. It distinguishes from sibling tools like cache_get and cache_invalidate by focusing on storage.

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?

The description advises using make_cache_key for deterministic keys and explains the benefit (avoid re-running expensive operations). Could explicitly mention when to use alternatives (e.g., cache_get before storing) but provides clear context.

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