Skip to main content
Glama

get_worldview

Retrieve current worldview primitives and beliefs to understand system perspectives and maintain continuity in AI memory storage.

Instructions

Retrieve current worldview primitives and beliefs

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The actual implementation of getWorldviewPrimitives() method that queries the worldview_primitives table, ordered by confidence and stability score
    async getWorldviewPrimitives() {
      try {
        const primitives = await this.db
          .select()
          .from(schema.worldviewPrimitives)
          .orderBy(
            desc(schema.worldviewPrimitives.confidence),
            desc(schema.worldviewPrimitives.stabilityScore)
          );
    
        return primitives;
      } catch (error) {
        console.error('Error getting worldview primitives:', error);
        throw error;
      }
    }
  • Tool schema definition for get_worldview with description and empty input parameters
    name: "get_worldview",
    description: "Retrieve current worldview primitives and beliefs",
    inputSchema: {
      type: "object",
      properties: {}
    }
  • mcp.js:589-591 (registration)
    MCP server request handler that routes get_worldview calls to the memory manager method
    case "get_worldview":
      const worldview = await memoryManager.getWorldviewPrimitives();
      return { content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(worldview, null, 2) }] };
  • mcp.js:191-196 (registration)
    MCP server tool registration for get_worldview in ListToolsRequestSchema handler
    name: "get_worldview",
    description: "Retrieve current worldview primitives and beliefs",
    inputSchema: {
      type: "object",
      properties: {}
    }
  • Database schema definition for worldview_primitives table with category, belief, confidence, emotionalValence, and other fields
    export const worldviewPrimitives = pgTable("worldview_primitives", {
    	id: uuid().defaultRandom().primaryKey().notNull(),
    	category: text().notNull(),
    	belief: text().notNull(),
    	confidence: doublePrecision(),
    	emotionalValence: doublePrecision("emotional_valence"),
    	stabilityScore: doublePrecision("stability_score"),
    	connectedBeliefs: uuid("connected_beliefs").array(),
    	activationPatterns: jsonb("activation_patterns"),
    	memoryFilterRules: jsonb("memory_filter_rules"),
    	influencePatterns: jsonb("influence_patterns"),
    	preferredClusters: uuid("preferred_clusters").array(),
    });

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions retrieval but doesn't specify if this is a read-only operation, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what the output format might be. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior and constraints.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's function without any fluff or repetition. It is front-loaded with the core action ('retrieve') and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool that likely returns complex data (worldview primitives and beliefs). It doesn't explain what the output contains, how it's structured, or any behavioral aspects like side effects, making it inadequate for full contextual understanding.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, and the input schema has 100% description coverage (though empty). The description doesn't need to add parameter details, so it appropriately focuses on the tool's purpose without redundancy. A baseline of 4 is given as it avoids unnecessary parameter explanation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the tool retrieves 'current worldview primitives and beliefs', which provides a general purpose but lacks specificity about what these primitives and beliefs entail or how they differ from related tools like 'get_identity_core' or 'get_active_themes'. It uses a clear verb ('retrieve') but doesn't distinguish itself from siblings beyond the resource name.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_identity_core' or 'get_active_themes'. The description implies it's for retrieving worldview data but offers no context on prerequisites, timing, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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