Engram

brain_move

Move or rename a note to archive outdated content, ensuring it is demoted in search and no longer misleads agents while preserving the reasoning trail.

Instructions

Move or rename a note. This is how you retire something: when a note stops being true, move it to an archive folder (see brain_schema → conventions.ranking.archiveFolders) rather than deleting it. Archived notes are demoted in search and excluded by default, so they stop misleading agents while the reasoning trail survives. Leave a pointer in the replacement note saying what superseded what.

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": {
      "from": "<from>",
      "to": "<to>"
    },
    "name": "brain_move"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`to`	Yes	new path
`from`	Yes	current path

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It explains that archived notes are demoted in search and excluded by default, adding useful behavioral context beyond the basic move operation.

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?

Three sentences effectively cover purpose, usage scenario, and a procedural detail (leaving a pointer) with no unnecessary words.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description adequately covers usage context and behavioral effects. It references conventions and distinguishes from alternatives, though it omits error handling or limitations.

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% with parameter descriptions. The description adds context about archive folders but does not significantly enhance parameter meaning beyond the schema.

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 'Move or rename a note' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like brain_delete and brain_edit by emphasizing the archival use case.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly describes when to use this tool (for retiring notes that are no longer true) and provides guidance on using archive folders and leaving pointers, effectively differentiating from deletion.

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

Deploy Server