Skip to main content
Glama

Geohash

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Remember

remember
Idempotent

Save data the agent will need to reuse later — across this conversation or across sessions. Use when you discover something worth carrying forward (a resolved ticker, a target address, a user preference, a research subject) so you don't have to look it up again. Stored as a key-value pair scoped by your identifier. Authenticated users get persistent memory; anonymous sessions retain memory for 24 hours. Pair with recall to retrieve later, forget to delete.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYesMemory key (e.g., "subject_property", "target_ticker", "user_preference")
valueYesValue to store (any text — findings, addresses, preferences, notes)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations give idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description goes beyond by clarifying scoping (by agent identifier), persistence differences (authenticated vs. anonymous, 24-hour expiry), and that it is a key-value store. No contradictions with 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?

Four sentences, no filler. Front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value—scope, use cases, pairing information.

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 2 simple parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains the mechanics (key-value, scoped, persistence) and lifecycle (pairing with recall/forget). No gaps for a tool of this complexity.

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 100% with good descriptions for key and value. The description adds examples of key names and value types (findings, addresses, etc.) but this is incremental over the schema's own descriptions. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 starts with a clear verb+resource: 'Save data the agent will need to reuse later'. It includes specific examples (resolved ticker, target address, user preference, research subject) and distinguishes from sibling tools like recall and forget.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states 'Use when you discover something worth carrying forward' and directly names alternatives: 'Pair with recall to retrieve later, forget to delete.' This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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

All Geohash toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools have heavily overlapping purposes: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, and ask_pipeworx_grounded share the same router, with beta explicitly documented as currently identical, while discover_tools/suggest_questions and the several Polymarket analysis tools also blur together. The detailed descriptions help only after careful reading; an agent can easily misselect.

Naming Consistency2/5

Names are all snake_case, but the conventions are mixed: verb_noun (encode_geohash, generate_llms_txt, scan_dependency) coexists with bare verbs (remember, forget), noun phrases (entity_profile, polymarket_arbitrage), and adjective-noun forms (recent_alerts, recent_changes). The Pipeworx family has ask_pipeworx variants but no predictable pattern across the set.

Tool Count2/5

33 tools is well over the useful focused-server range, and the mismatch with the server name is stark: only 2 of 33 tools actually relate to geohashing. The remaining 31 form a sprawling data-research, prediction-market, memory, and subscription toolkit that would be heavy even as a standalone Pipeworx server.

Completeness2/5

For the geohash core, encode/decode covers the basic operation but lacks obvious utilities like neighbors, distance, or batch decoding. For the broader implicit Pipeworx surface, there is no coherent lifecycle tying the research, prediction-market, and subscription features together, and several workflows dead-end at analysis.

Resources