Skip to main content
Glama

XMemo

by io.github.yonro

Update XMemo memory

update_memory
Destructive

Updates the content, location, or type of a specific saved memory when the user asks to correct, revise, move, or reclassify it. An exact reference identifies the record.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathNoA simple user-facing category or path for this memory, such as preferences, projects/xmemo, or personal/travel.
contentNoText body to save, such as a memory, TODO/action item, event note, or state summary.
memory_idYesExact XMemo memory reference shown by search or recall.
memory_typeNoOptional memory type/category for user-facing updates, such as semantic, episodic, or procedural.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed16 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • removedInput schema / properties / bucket
      Removed value: -{
-  "default": "",
-  "description": "Memory bucket or namespace to read from or write to; use % only for tools that support wildcard reads.",
-  "title": "Bucket",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / confidence
      Removed value: -{
-  "anyOf": [
-    {
-      "type": "number"
-    },
-    {
-      "type": "null"
-    }
-  ],
-  "default": null,
-  "description": "Confidence score for the saved or updated memory, from 0.0 to 1.0.",
-  "title": "Confidence"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / detect_conflicts
      Removed value: -{
-  "default": true,
-  "description": "Whether to detect possible conflicts with existing memories during an update.",
-  "title": "Detect Conflicts",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / expires_at
      Removed value: -{
-  "default": "",
-  "description": "Optional ISO 8601 expiration timestamp for the memory.",
-  "title": "Expires At",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / importance
      Removed value: -{
-  "anyOf": [
-    {
-      "type": "number"
-    },
-    {
-      "type": "null"
-    }
-  ],
-  "default": null,
-  "description": "Importance score for the saved or updated memory, from 0.0 to 1.0.",
-  "title": "Importance"
-}
    • changedInput schema / properties / memory_type / description
      Previous value: -"Memory type/category filter or value, such as episodic, identity, procedural, semantic, working, auto, or %."New value: +"Optional memory type/category for user-facing updates, such as semantic, episodic, or procedural."
    • removedInput schema / properties / merge_metadata
      Removed value: -{
-  "default": true,
-  "description": "Whether to merge new metadata with existing metadata instead of replacing it.",
-  "title": "Merge Metadata",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / merge_provenance
      Removed value: -{
-  "default": true,
-  "description": "Whether to merge new provenance with existing provenance instead of replacing it.",
-  "title": "Merge Provenance",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / metadata_json
      Removed value: -{
-  "default": "{}",
-  "description": "Optional JSON object string with extra metadata for the operation.",
-  "title": "Metadata Json",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / provenance_json
      Removed value: -{
-  "default": "{}",
-  "description": "Optional JSON object string describing memory source, evidence, or attribution.",
-  "title": "Provenance Json",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / scope
      Removed value: -{
-  "default": "",
-  "description": "Optional scope that narrows memory access; leave blank for the token default.",
-  "title": "Scope",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / semantic_key
      Removed value: -{
-  "default": "",
-  "description": "Optional stable semantic key used to identify or upsert a memory concept.",
-  "title": "Semantic Key",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / status
      Removed value: -{
-  "default": "",
-  "description": "Memory status filter or update value, such as active, archived, deleted, or %.",
-  "title": "Status",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / supersession_reason
      Removed value: -{
-  "default": "",
-  "description": "Reason the updated memory supersedes older content.",
-  "title": "Supersession Reason",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / team_id
      Removed value: -{
-  "default": "",
-  "description": "Optional team/workspace identifier for team-scoped memory access.",
-  "title": "Team Id",
-  "type": "string"
-}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, setting the safety baseline. The description adds useful context about the need for an exact reference and the updatable aspects, but it does not explain side effects like partial vs. full replacement, handling of non-existent IDs, or whether all optional fields default behavior. Thus it adds some value beyond annotations but not extensive.

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 concise: two sentences, no filler, and front-loaded with the action and resource. It covers the purpose and the key constraint (exact reference) without redundancy.

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?

For a mutating tool with an output schema and annotations, the description is reasonably complete: it explains the trigger, the aspects updated, and the need for an exact reference. However, with many sibling tools including project_workspace_memory_update, it does not explicitly distinguish from that potentially similar tool, which could cause confusion in selection. The description is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 descriptions already cover 100% of the four parameters with detailed explanations. The description's mention of 'content, location, or type' maps to the content, path, and memory_type parameters, reinforcing the schema but not adding new semantics. The baseline for full schema coverage is 3, and no additional parameter insight is provided.

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 updates a specific saved memory, with a specific verb ('Updates') and resource ('saved memory'). It specifies the scope (content, location, or type) and the trigger (user asks to correct, revise, move, or reclassify), distinguishing it from create/delete/read siblings like 'remember', 'forget', and 'search_memory'.

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?

The description provides clear context for when to use the tool ('when the user asks to correct, revise, move, or reclassify it') and notes that an exact reference identifies the record, implying that memory_id is required and likely obtained from prior search/recall. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficient for most cases.

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

All XMemo 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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Multiple memory-retrieval tools (recall, search_memory, recall_context, read_memory, memory_overview) have overlapping purposes; detailed descriptions help but an agent could easily pick the wrong one. Similarly, ledger/open_ledger and todo/open_todo_board split text vs UI interaction, and forget overlaps with todo delete_all and ledger deletion.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most tools follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern (read_memory, update_memory, search_memory, open_ledger). However, several tools use bare nouns or verbs (forget, ledger, project, todo, recall, remember) and memory_overview is noun_noun, creating inconsistent conventions.

Tool Count3/5

19 tools is on the heavy side for the apparent scope, and the surface includes several pairs that duplicate the same domain in text vs UI form (ledger/open_ledger, todo/open_todo_board). Still, the count is defensible given the combined memory, project, TODO, and ledger coverage.

Completeness4/5

Memory has full lifecycle coverage (remember, read, search/recall, update, forget, restore), and TODO and Ledger workflows are largely complete. Minor gaps exist—no explicit project deletion and no pure text list-projects tool—but core workflows do not dead-end.

Resources