Novel Memory MCP
Related Servers
Alternatives to Novel Memory MCP
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceExposes a private social memory archive to AI assistants via MCP, enabling read-only queries about the user's posts, people, and preferences with tools like search, whoami, and timeline.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI clients like Claude, ChatGPT, and Cursor to search, read, and write back to one cross-model Markdown library of saved articles, videos, PDFs, notes, and conversations. Hosted remote server with OAuth 2.1 or Agent-key auth and read_only, edit, or full permission tiers.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI agents to search and read Markdown notes by keyword, meaning and links, with cited recall and honest no-match results. It also supports guarded, evidence-checked memory writes with receipts, conflict handling and lifecycle-aware filtering.2MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI clients to read, search, remember, and correct Markdown context stored in a private GitHub repository, with OAuth-scoped writes and SHA-checked updates to prevent overwriting newer edits.Apache 2.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables MCP-compatible AIs to read a user's local three-layer memory of their own typed chat messages, including raw text, conversation summaries, and theme indexes, so responses can be grounded in the user's past decisions and preferences.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI assistants to search and retrieve a locally stored archive of past conversations, notes, and captured Codex events, preserving full original text and provenance in SQLite full-text search. It offers read-only access through two tools, search_memory and get_memory, so context from earlier chats can be reused without pasting it again.MIT
TDQS
Scored across 4 tools
The discovery pair (list_memory_tags → search_memory) and the retrieval pair (get_memory / get_memories) are each clearly explained, and the descriptions explicitly state the intended call order. The main risk is get_memory vs get_memories, which differ only by an 's' and could be misselected, though the 'max two stages' note mitigates this.
All names are snake_case with a verb_noun structure (search_memory, list_memory_tags, get_memory, get_memories), which is predictable and readable. The only blemish is that get_memory/get_memories rely on pluralization alone to distinguish a batch variant, a minor deviation from clean naming.
Four tools is a tight, well-scoped set for a read-only curated-memory server, and each tool has a distinct role in the discover-then-fetch flow. It is on the thin side, but nothing is redundant and no tool feels gratuitous.
The retrieval lifecycle is covered end to end: list tags, search by keyword, fetch one stage, fetch a small batch. Gaps are minor and arguably intentional (no write/update/delete since memories are manually maintained, and no way to enumerate all stages without tags), which agents can work around via list_memory_tags.