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

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Description adds persistence details beyond annotations: key-value pair scoped by identifier, 24-hour TTL for anonymous sessions, persistent for authenticated users. It does not contradict annotations (idempotent, non-destructive). Minor omission: no mention of overwrite behavior when saving an existing key.

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?

The description is compact: one purpose sentence, one usage sentence, and one technical sentence. It is front-loaded with the primary action and avoids fluff.

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 operation with annotations covering idempotence and non-destructiveness, the description covers all essential operational context: what to save, when, persistence behavior, and companion retrieval/deletion tools. No output schema is needed for this 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 descriptive parameter docs for key and value. The description reinforces the key-value pairing but adds no new syntax or format details beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Save data the agent will need to reuse later.' It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly pairing with recall (retrieve) and forget (delete), and includes concrete examples (ticker, address, preference).

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'Use when you discover something worth carrying forward... so you don't have to look it up again.' It also names companion tools ('Pair with recall to retrieve later, forget to delete'), making alternative usage clear.

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 mixes several overlapping families—ask_pipeworx/ask_pipeworx_beta/ask_pipeworx_grounded, six Polymarket tools, ai_visibility_check/scan_competitor_ai_presence, and the memory tools—so an agent can easily misselect. Although many descriptions are rich, the tool boundaries are not distinct enough, and two tools are explicitly near-identical at present.

Naming Consistency3/5

Names are all lowercase snake_case with some logical prefixes (page_*, polymarket_*, pipeworx_*), but conventions mix imperative verbs (remember, forget, subscribe), bare nouns/adjectives (random, featured, onthisday), and descriptive noun phrases (entity_profile, page_html). The pattern is readable but not consistent enough to predict tool names reliably.

Tool Count2/5

42 tools is far beyond the well-scoped range, especially given that the server is labeled 'Wikimedia Rest' but most tools target Pipeworx data research, prediction markets, npm scanning, memory, and AI marketing. Many tools could be consolidated or split into separate servers.

Completeness3/5

For reading Wikipedia content the page_* tools are fairly complete, and the Pipeworx side covers ask/research/resolve/validate workflows. However, major gaps exist for a coherent user: no Wikipedia search/resolve-title tool, no article diff or edit workflow, and the 'Wikimedia Rest' server lacks any write or query surface matching its name; the overall domain is so diffuse that completeness is hard to assess.