Skip to main content
Glama

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

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description adds useful context beyond annotations: key-value pair scoped by identifier, persistence differences for authenticated vs. anonymous sessions (24-hour retention). No contradictions with annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false). Does not explicitly mention overwrite behavior, but idempotentHint implies it.

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 paragraph of 4 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then usage guidelines, then technical details. No superfluous information; every sentence adds value.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the low complexity (2 required params, no output schema), the description is largely complete. It covers purpose, usage, persistence scoping, and pairing with sibling tools. Could mention return value or overwrite behavior, but not critical for a simple storage tool.

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 clear descriptions. The description reinforces the purpose but does not add significant new detail beyond the examples already in the schema for 'key' and 'value'. Baseline score of 3 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 clearly states 'Save data the agent will need to reuse later' and provides specific examples of when to use it (resolved ticker, address, user preference). It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly mentioning recall and forget as complementary tools.

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?

The description says 'Use when you discover something worth carrying forward' and 'so you don't have to look it up again', providing clear guidance on when to use. It also mentions pairing with recall and forget, indicating appropriate alternatives.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

The set contains multiple near-overlapping query tools (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, discover_tools) and a cluster of prediction-market tools (polymarket_arbitrage, polymarket_edges, polymarket_edge_tracker, polymarket_fill_risk, polymarket_kalshi_spread) with fuzzy boundaries. ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are explicitly identical right now, making misselection likely.

Naming Consistency2/5

Naming is mixed across clusters: get_* for NHL tools, ask_pipeworx* for queries, polymarket_* for prediction markets, bare verbs (remember, recall, forget), and noun_verb phrases (entity_profile, recent_changes, scan_dependency). Each cluster is internally consistent, but there is no unifying pattern across the server.

Tool Count1/5

35 tools on a server named 'Nhl' is an extreme mismatch: only 4 tools actually relate to NHL data, while the other 31 are a general-purpose Pipeworx data/research/prediction-market platform. The set is not well-scoped for its apparent purpose, and even as a general data server it feels like a grab bag of unrelated capabilities.

Completeness2/5

For the NHL domain the surface is thin: player, schedule, scores, and standings, but no team info, roster lookup, player search by name, or game/play-by-play details. The Pipeworx side is more complete but fills the server with functionality unrelated to the NHL branding, so the overall surface is fragmented and leaves obvious domain gaps.