Skip to main content
Glama

memory.propose_update

Propose structured edits to project memory files. Validates each operation for schema compliance, secrets, and provenance, then automatically applies safe updates or stages changes for human review.

Instructions

Propose one or more structured edits to the project's .agent-memory/ files. Each operation is validated against the schema, scanned for secrets, and checked for required provenance. Depending on the intent and category, the proposal is either applied immediately or staged under .agent-memory/staging// for human review via the apply/reject CLI commands. A rejected proposal is reported in the response body, not as a transport error.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
intentYesintent: update_current | update_shared | session_log | add_pitfall | record_decision | refresh_module | update_conventions | archive_stale
rationaleNoshort human-readable reason; shown in CLI status and used in the staging-id slug
operationsYesone or more structured edits to apply
sourcesNoprovenance citations (required for some categories, e.g. decisions)
confidenceNoconfirmed | inferred | user-provided | stale | unknown
ownerNoidentifier of the proposing agent; recorded in lock metadata

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusYesapplied | staged | rejected
reasonNoon rejection: stable reason code (invalid_intent, secret_detected, ...)
messageNohuman-readable detail to accompany the reason code
routingNoresolved approval routing for traceability
staging_idNoon staged: directory name under .agent-memory/staging/
filesNoforward-slash relative paths the proposal touched
findingsNoon secret_detected: per-finding type + line
violationsNoon validation_failed: per-section schema violations
provenance_violationsNoon provenance_violation: list of violation strings
applied_atNoon applied: RFC3339 UTC write time
affected_sectionsNoon applied: (file, section_id) pairs touched
index_updatedNoon applied: whether the FTS index was refreshed
warningsNoon applied: non-fatal advisories
staging_ttl_secondsNoon staged: seconds until the proposal expires
human_approval_requiredNoon staged: always true — a human must review
review_commandNoon staged: CLI command to inspect the proposal
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes validation, secret scanning, provenance requirements, immediate vs staged application, and rejection handling. Very transparent.

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?

Description is dense but well-structured, covering all key aspects without verbosity. Slightly longer than minimal but earns its content.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given complexity (nested operations, multiple intents, review workflow) and presence of output schema, description fully covers behavioral aspects and lifecycle. No gaps.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds context on intent categories and staging but does not significantly enhance parameter meaning beyond 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?

Clearly states it proposes structured edits to .agent-memory/ files, with specific verbs and resource. Distinguished from siblings memory.fetch_context and memory.status, which are read-only and status checks respectively.

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?

Explains when proposals are applied immediately vs staged for human review, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives. However, given siblings, context is clear.

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/xChuCx/agent-memory'

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