Skip to main content
Glama

Memory Get

localnest_memory_get
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a stored memory with its revision history from the LocalNest MCP server's local-first storage system.

Instructions

Fetch one stored memory with revision history.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
response_formatNojson

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYes
metaNo

Implementation Reference

  • The handler for localnest_memory_get, which uses the memory service to fetch an entry by ID.
    async ({ id }) => {
      const item = await memory.getEntry(id);
      if (!item) {
        throw new Error(`memory not found: ${id}`);
      }
      return normalizeMemoryEntryPayload(item);
    }
  • The registration of the localnest_memory_get tool, including its schema and handler definition.
    registerJsonTool(
      ['localnest_memory_get'],
      {
        title: 'Memory Get',
        description: 'Fetch one stored memory with revision history.',
        inputSchema: {
          id: z.string().min(1)
        },
        annotations: {
          readOnlyHint: true,
          destructiveHint: false,
          idempotentHint: true,
          openWorldHint: false
        }
      },
      async ({ id }) => {
        const item = await memory.getEntry(id);
        if (!item) {
          throw new Error(`memory not found: ${id}`);
        }
        return normalizeMemoryEntryPayload(item);
      }
    );
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that the tool returns 'revision history' alongside the memory, which is valuable behavioral context about the data payload. However, it lacks details on error handling (e.g., what happens if the ID doesn't exist) or performance characteristics.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The single sentence is front-loaded with the action verb 'Fetch' and contains no redundant or filler words. It efficiently communicates the core operation. However, given the lack of schema documentation, the description may be overly concise at the expense of completeness.

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?

For a 2-parameter read operation with an output schema, the description is minimally viable. It correctly identifies the return value characteristic (revision history) but fails to document the input parameters despite the schema having 0% description coverage. It meets baseline needs but has clear gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for both parameters. It implicitly references the required 'id' parameter via 'Fetch one... memory', but provides no information about the optional 'response_format' parameter (enum of json/markdown). This leaves critical parameter semantics undocumented.

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 uses specific verb 'Fetch' with clear resource 'stored memory' and scope 'one'. Mentioning 'revision history' distinguishes it from sibling tools like localnest_memory_list or localnest_memory_recall that likely return different data formats. However, it doesn't explicitly name the distinguishing siblings.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the 15+ sibling memory tools (e.g., when to use localnest_memory_get vs localnest_memory_recall or localnest_memory_status). While 'revision history' implies a use case, there are no 'when-to-use' or 'when-not-to-use' statements.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/wmt-mobile/localnest'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server