Skip to main content
Glama
skynetcmd

M3 Memory

by skynetcmd
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

memory_search

Search stored memories by semantic similarity or keywords, with optional user and scope filters for isolated results.

Instructions

Search across memory items using semantic similarity or keyword matching. Filter by user_id and scope for isolation.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kNo
as_ofNo
queryYes
scopeNo
explainNo
timeoutNo
user_idNo
variantNo
databaseNo
adaptive_kNo
as_recordsNo
search_modeNohybrid
type_filterNo
agent_filterNo
recency_biasNo
conversation_idNo
requesting_agentNo
include_bench_dataNo
include_scratchpadNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.20
    • addedInput schema / properties / as_records
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "title": "As Records",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Addedv0.1.9
  3. Removedv0.1.7
  4. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.1.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / explain
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "title": "Explain",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / requesting_agent
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "",
+  "title": "Requesting Agent",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / timeout
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 30,
+  "title": "Timeout",
+  "type": "number"
+}
  5. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
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 search modes but does not disclose side effects (presumably read-only), limitations, or consequences of omitted filters (e.g., potential cross-user exposure). It does not clarify the return format or behavior like pagination or result count.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, concise sentence that front-loads the core action. However, it is too brief to be considered appropriately sized given the tool's complexity; it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (19 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is far from complete. It lacks any explanation of return values, parameter usage, search modes, or configuration options. An agent would struggle to invoke this tool correctly with only this description.

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 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameters. It only mentions user_id and scope, leaving 17 other parameters (k, search_mode, recency_bias, adaptive_k, etc.) entirely unexplained. This is a severe gap for a tool with 19 parameters.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: searching memory items via semantic similarity or keyword matching. It also mentions filtering by user_id and scope, which conveys the resource and scope. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like memory_get, the verb 'search' and mention of multiple matching modes imply a query-based retrieval tool.

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 offers minimal guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It hints at isolation filtering but does not explicitly state when to use this over memory_get (retrieval by ID) or memory_write (creation). No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided.

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