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

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context: memory scoped by identifier, persistent for authenticated users, 24-hour retention for anonymous, and that it's a key-value store. No contradiction 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, front-loaded with core purpose. Every sentence adds essential information (when to use, scoping, persistence, pairing with sibling tools). No wasted words.

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?

For a simple 2-parameter write tool with no output schema, the description fully covers purpose, usage, behavior, and lifecycle. No gaps given the tool's 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 descriptions for key and value. The description provides example key formats and notes value can be any text, but these add minimal information beyond the schema. Baseline 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 clearly states the tool saves data for reuse across conversations/sessions. It provides concrete examples (resolved ticker, target address, user preference) and distinguishes from siblings (recall, forget) by naming them.

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 says 'Use when you discover something worth carrying forward' and instructs to pair with recall and forget. Also notes scope (by identifier) and lifespan differences for authenticated vs. anonymous users.

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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools have overlapping purposes: ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are currently identical, deep_research and ask_pipeworx both answer broad factual questions, and the polymarket tools (polymarket_edges, polymarket_arbitrage, polymarket_edge_tracker, polymarket_fill_risk, bet_research) cover heavily overlapping edge/arb research territory. An agent could easily route a query to the wrong one.

Naming Consistency2/5

Most tools use snake_case, but there is no consistent verb_noun pattern: ask_pipeworx, deep_research, bet_research, recent_changes, remember/recall/forget, generate_llms_txt, realestateapi_property_detail, and polymarket_edges all follow different structural conventions. The server name Realestateapi also does not match the broader Pipeworx/polymarket tool set.

Tool Count2/5

34 tools is above the 25+ threshold for a heavy, hard-to-navigate surface, especially for a server named Realestateapi where only 3 tools actually concern real estate. Many tools are generic utilities, memory helpers, feedback channels, and prediction-market tooling that feel unrelated to the apparent real-estate API scope.

Completeness2/5

For a real-estate-focused server, the surface is significantly incomplete: property search, property detail, and skip-trace cover only basic owner/value lookups. Missing obvious real-estate capabilities like comparable sales, tax history, market trends, school/flood data, and listing lifecycle operations create notable gaps an agent would need to work around.