midas-memory-mcp

by vornicx

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

Inspect memory

inspect_memory

Read-only

Retrieve a specific memory by its ID without searching, modifying, or exposing embeddings.

Instructions

Inspect one stored memory by id without search, mutation, or embedding exposure.

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": {
      "memory_id": "<memory_id>"
    },
    "name": "inspect_memory"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`memory_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint, and the description adds that it operates without search, mutation, or embedding exposure. This adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations.

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?

Single sentence, 13 words, front-loaded with core action. Every word adds value. No redundancy.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Tool is simple, but no output schema exists. Description should at least hint at what 'inspect' returns (e.g., memory contents or metadata). Missing this information makes it incomplete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It states 'by id', linking the parameter to its purpose, but lacks details on id format, constraints, or return value. Minimal compensation.

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 uses specific verb 'Inspect' and resource 'memory by id', and distinguishes from sibling tools like recall (search), remember (mutation), and build_context (embedding exposure).

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 states what the tool does not do (search, mutation, embedding exposure), providing clear context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools for when not to use it.

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