Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

agent-memory-systems(Agent 记忆系统)

agent-memory-systems 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

agent-memory-systems 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为需要联网;许可证为 MIT,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,674 个 Skill 里排第 4,504。

总安装 31,824周安装 1,288GitHub Stars 35,670下载 10,296核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
MIT

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:agent-memory-systems(Agent 记忆系统)
来源仓库:https://github.com/sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills
仓库路径:skills/agent-memory-systems
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills --skill agent-memory-systems
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。不同来源提供的安装方式可能略有差异;本站展示可直接复制的安装命令,安装前请核对来源页面。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills --skill agent-memory-systems

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

代理的多层记忆架构:短期上下文、长期向量存储和检索优化。

涵盖七种记忆类型:短期(上下文窗口)、长期(向量存储)、工作记忆、情景记忆、语义记忆和程序记忆,每种记忆类型适合不同的信息模式 提供三种核心模式:内存类型选择、向量存储选择和分块策略,以最大限度地提高检索精度 强调关键的检索挑战:上下文分块、元数据过滤、时间评分和嵌入模型跟踪,以防止因召回率低而导致的“智能失败” 警告常见陷阱:无限期地存储所有内容、在不测试检索的情况下进行分块以及对所有数据使用单一内存类型

来源仓库内路径:skills/agent-memory-systems

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills --skill age…;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要需要联网,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

agent-memory-systems 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills --skill agent-memory-…。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

agent-memory-systems 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

agent-memory-systems 需要什么权限?

权限级别是需要联网。该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

agent-memory-systems 是免费的吗?

来源标注的许可证是 MIT。本站不代收任何费用,也不托管安装包;能否商用、要不要署名,以许可证原文为准。

agent-memory-systems 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 31,824 次,近一周安装 1,288 次,下载 10,296 次,GitHub 35,670 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

agent-memory-systems 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。
  • 3 个目录同时收录,说明这个 Skill 流传比较广。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT,商用和分发边界好判断。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。

先想清楚的地方

  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。
  • 需要许可证清楚、并且有第三方扫描结果的团队项目。

不太适合

  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
agent-memory-systems

Agent 记忆系统 · 本页

31,82435,670需要联网MIT通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

Agent Memory Systems

Memory is the cornerstone of intelligent agents. Without it, every interaction starts from zero. This skill covers the architecture of agent memory: short-term (context window), long-term (vector stores), and the cognitive architectures that organize them.

Key insight: Memory isn't just storage - it's retrieval. A million stored facts mean nothing if you can't find the right one. Chunking, embedding, and retrieval strategies determine whether your agent remembers or forgets.

The field is fragmented with inconsistent terminology. We use the CoALA cognitive architecture framework: semantic memory (facts), episodic memory (experiences), and procedural memory (how-to knowledge).

Principles

  • Memory quality = retrieval quality, not storage quantity
  • Chunk for retrieval, not for storage
  • Context isolation is the enemy of memory
  • Right memory type for right information
  • Decay old memories - not everything should be forever
  • Test retrieval accuracy before production
  • Background memory formation beats real-time

Capabilities

  • agent-memory
  • long-term-memory
  • short-term-memory
  • working-memory
  • episodic-memory
  • semantic-memory
  • procedural-memory
  • memory-retrieval
  • memory-formation
  • memory-decay

Scope

  • vector-database-operations → data-engineer
  • rag-pipeline-architecture → llm-architect
  • embedding-model-selection → ml-engineer
  • knowledge-graph-design → knowledge-engineer

Tooling

Memory_frameworks

  • LangMem (LangChain) - When: LangGraph agents with persistent memory Note: Semantic, episodic, procedural memory types
  • MemGPT / Letta - When: Virtual context management, OS-style memory Note: Hierarchical memory tiers, automatic paging
  • Mem0 - When: User memory layer for personalization Note: Designed for user preferences and history

Vector_stores

  • Pinecone - When: Managed, enterprise-scale (billions of vectors) Note: Best query performance, highest cost
  • Qdrant - When: Complex metadata filtering, open-source Note: Rust-based, excellent filtering
  • Weaviate - When: Hybrid search, knowledge graph features Note: GraphQL interface, good for relationships
  • ChromaDB - When: Prototyping, small/medium apps Note: Developer-friendly, ~20ms p50 at 100K vectors
  • pgvector - When: Already using PostgreSQL, simpler setup Note: Good for <1M vectors, familiar tooling

Embedding_models

  • OpenAI text-embedding-3-large - When: Best quality, 3072 dimensions Note: $0.13/1M tokens
  • OpenAI text-embedding-3-small - When: Good balance, 1536 dimensions Note: $0.02/1M tokens, 5x cheaper
  • nomic-embed-text-v1.5 - When: Open-source, local deployment Note: 768 dimensions, good quality
  • all-MiniLM-L6-v2 - When: Lightweight, fast local embedding Note: 384 dimensions, lowest latency

Patterns

Memory Type Architecture

Choosing the right memory type for different information

When to use: Designing agent memory system

MEMORY TYPE ARCHITECTURE (CoALA Framework):

""" Three memory types for different purposes:

  1. Semantic Memory: Facts and knowledge

- What you know about the world - User preferences, domain knowledge - Stored in profiles (structured) or collections (unstructured)

  1. Episodic Memory: Experiences and events

- What happened (timestamped events) - Past conversations, task outcomes - Used for learning from experience

  1. Procedural Memory: How to do things

- Rules, skills, workflows - Often implemented as few-shot examples - "How did I solve this before?" """

LangMem Implementation

""" from langmem import MemoryStore from langgraph.graph import StateGraph

Initialize memory store

memory = MemoryStore(connection_string=os.environ["POSTGRES_URL"])

Semantic memory: user profile

await memory.semantic.upsert(namespace="user_profile", key=user_id, content={"name": "Alice", "preferences": ["dark mode", "concise responses"], "expertise_level": "developer",})

Episodic memory: past interaction

await memory.episodic.add(namespace="conversations", content={"timestamp": datetime.now(), "summary": "Helped debug authentication issue", "outcome": "resolved", "key_insights": ["Token expiry was root cause"],}, metadata={"user_id": user_id, "topic": "debugging"})

Procedural memory: learned pattern

await memory.procedural.add(namespace="skills", content={"task_type": "debug_auth", "steps": ["Check token expiry", "Verify refresh flow"], "example_interaction": few_shot_example,}) """

Memory Retrieval at Runtime

""" async def prepare_context(user_id, query): # Get user profile (semantic) profile = await memory.semantic.get(namespace="user_profile", key=user_id)

# Find relevant past experiences (episodic)
similar_experiences = await memory.episodic.search(
    namespace="conversations",
    query=query,
    filter={"user_id": user_id},
    limit=3
)

# Find relevant skills (procedural)
relevant_skills = await memory.procedural.search(
    namespace="skills",
    query=query,
    limit=2
)

return {
    "profile": profile,
    "past_experiences": similar_experiences,
    "relevant_skills": relevant_skills,
}

"""

Vector Store Selection Pattern

Choosing the right vector database for your use case

When to use: Setting up persistent memory storage

VECTOR STORE SELECTION:

""" Decision matrix:

PineconeQdrantWeaviateChromaDBpgvector
ScaleBillions100M+100M+1M1M
ManagedYesBothBothSelfSelf
FilteringBasicBestGoodBasicSQL
HybridNoYesBestNoYes
CostHighMediumMediumFreeFree
Latency5ms7ms10ms20ms15ms
"""

Pinecone (Enterprise Scale)

""" from pinecone import Pinecone

pc = Pinecone(api_key=os.environ["PINECONE_API_KEY"]) index = pc.Index("agent-memory")

Upsert with metadata

index.upsert(vectors=[{"id": f"memory-{uuid4()}", "values": embedding, "metadata": {"user_id": user_id, "timestamp": datetime.now().isoformat(), "type": "episodic", "content": memory_text,}}], namespace=namespace)

Query with filter

results = index.query(vector=query_embedding, filter={"user_id": user_id, "type": "episodic"}, top_k=5, include_metadata=True) """

Qdrant (Complex Filtering)

""" from qdrant_client import QdrantClient from qdrant_client.models import PointStruct, Filter, FieldCondition

client = QdrantClient(url="http://localhost:6333")

Complex filtering with Qdrant

results = client.search(collection_name="agent_memory", query_vector=query_embedding, query_filter=Filter(must=[FieldCondition(key="user_id", match={"value": user_id}), FieldCondition(key="type", match={"value": "semantic"}),], should=[FieldCondition(key="topic", match={"any": ["auth", "security"]}),]), limit=5) """

ChromaDB (Prototyping)

""" import chromadb

client = chromadb.PersistentClient(path="./memory_db") collection = client.get_or_create_collection("agent_memory")

Simple and fast for prototypes

collection.add(ids=[str(uuid4())], embeddings=[embedding], documents=[memory_text], metadatas=[{"user_id": user_id, "type": "episodic"}])

results = collection.query(query_embeddings=[query_embedding], n_results=5, where={"user_id": user_id}) """

Chunking Strategy Pattern

Breaking documents into retrievable chunks

When to use: Processing documents for memory storage

CHUNKING STRATEGIES:

""" The chunking dilemma:

  • Too large: Vector loses specificity
  • Too small: Loses context

Optimal chunk size depends on:

  • Document type (code vs prose vs data)
  • Query patterns (factual vs exploratory)
  • Embedding model (each has sweet spot)

General guidance: 256-512 tokens for most use cases """

Fixed-Size Chunking (Baseline)

""" from langchain.text_splitter import RecursiveCharacterTextSplitter

splitter = RecursiveCharacterTextSplitter(chunk_size=500, # Characters chunk_overlap=50, # Overlap prevents cutting sentences separators=["\n\n", "\n", ". ", " ", ""] # Priority order)

chunks = splitter.split_text(document) """

Semantic Chunking (Better Quality)

""" from langchain_experimental.text_splitter import SemanticChunker from langchain_openai import OpenAIEmbeddings

Splits based on semantic similarity

splitter = SemanticChunker(embeddings=OpenAIEmbeddings(), breakpoint_threshold_type="percentile", breakpoint_threshold_amount=95)

chunks = splitter.split_text(document) """

Structure-Aware Chunking (Documents with Hierarchy)

""" from langchain.text_splitter import MarkdownHeaderTextSplitter

Respect document structure

splitter = MarkdownHeaderTextSplitter(headers_to_split_on=[("#", "Header 1"), ("##", "Header 2"), ("###", "Header 3"),])

chunks = splitter.split_text(markdown_doc)

Each chunk has header metadata for context

"""

Contextual Chunking (Anthropic's Approach)

"""

Add context to each chunk before embedding

Reduces retrieval failures by 35%

def add_context_to_chunk(chunk, document_summary): context_prompt = f''' Document summary: {document_summary}

The following is a chunk from this document:
{chunk}
'''
return context_prompt

Embed the contextualized chunk, not raw chunk

for chunk in chunks: contextualized = add_context_to_chunk(chunk, summary) embedding = embed(contextualized) store(chunk, embedding) # Store original, embed contextualized """

Code-Specific Chunking

""" from langchain.text_splitter import Language, RecursiveCharacterTextSplitter

Language-aware splitting

python_splitter = RecursiveCharacterTextSplitter.from_language(language=Language.PYTHON, chunk_size=1000, chunk_overlap=200)

Respects function/class boundaries

chunks = python_splitter.split_text(python_code) """

Background Memory Formation

Processing memories asynchronously for better quality

When to use: You want higher recall without slowing interactions

BACKGROUND MEMORY FORMATION:

""" Real-time memory extraction slows conversations and adds complexity to agent tool calls. Background processing after conversations yields higher quality memories.

Pattern: Subconscious memory formation """

LangGraph Background Processing

""" from langgraph.graph import StateGraph from langgraph.checkpoint.postgres import PostgresSaver

async def background_memory_processor(thread_id: str): # Run after conversation ends or goes idle conversation = await load_conversation(thread_id)

# Extract insights without time pressure
insights = await llm.invoke('''
    Analyze this conversation and extract:
    1. Key facts learned about the user
    2. User preferences revealed
    3. Tasks completed or pending
    4. Patterns in user behavior

    Be thorough - this runs in background.

    Conversation:
    {conversation}
''')

# Store to long-term memory
for insight in insights:
    await memory.semantic.upsert(
        namespace="user_insights",
        key=generate_key(insight),
        content=insight,
        metadata={"source_thread": thread_id}
    )

Trigger on conversation end or idle timeout

@on_conversation_idle(timeout_minutes=5) async def process_conversation(thread_id): await background_memory_processor(thread_id) """

Memory Consolidation (Like Sleep)

"""

Periodically consolidate and deduplicate memories

async def consolidate_memories(user_id: str): # Get all memories for user memories = await memory.semantic.list(namespace="user_insights", filter={"user_id": user_id})

# Find similar memories (potential duplicates)
clusters = cluster_by_similarity(memories, threshold=0.9)

# Merge similar memories
for cluster in clusters:
    if len(cluster) > 1:
        merged = await llm.invoke(f'''
            Consolidate these related memories into one:
            {cluster}

            Preserve all important information.
        ''')
        await memory.semantic.upsert(
            namespace="user_insights",
            key=generate_key(merged),
            content=merged
        )
        # Delete originals
        for old in cluster:
            await memory.semantic.delete(old.id)

"""

Memory Decay Pattern

Forgetting old, irrelevant memories

When to use: Memory grows large, retrieval slows down

MEMORY DECAY:

""" Not all memories should live forever:

  • Old preferences may be outdated
  • Task details lose relevance
  • Conflicting memories confuse retrieval

Implement intelligent decay based on:

  • Recency (when was it created/accessed?)
  • Frequency (how often is it retrieved?)
  • Importance (is it a core fact or detail?) """

Time-Based Decay

""" from datetime import datetime, timedelta

async def decay_old_memories(namespace: str, max_age_days: int): cutoff = datetime.now() - timedelta(days=max_age_days)

old_memories = await memory.episodic.list(
    namespace=namespace,
    filter={"last_accessed": {"$lt": cutoff.isoformat()}}
)

for mem in old_memories:
    # Soft delete (mark as archived)
    await memory.episodic.update(
        id=mem.id,
        metadata={"archived": True, "archived_at": datetime.now()}
    )

"""

Utility-Based Decay (MIRIX Approach)

""" def calculate_memory_utility(memory): ''' Composite utility score inspired by cognitive science: - Recency: When was it last accessed? - Frequency: How often is it accessed? - Importance: How critical is this information? ''' now = datetime.now()

# Recency score (exponential decay with 72h half-life)
hours_since_access = (now - memory.last_accessed).total_seconds() / 3600
recency_score = 0.5 ** (hours_since_access / 72)

# Frequency score
frequency_score = min(memory.access_count / 10, 1.0)

# Importance (from metadata or heuristic)
importance = memory.metadata.get("importance", 0.5)

# Weighted combination
utility = (
    0.4 * recency_score +
    0.3 * frequency_score +
    0.3 * importance
)

return utility

async def prune_low_utility_memories(threshold=0.2): all_memories = await memory.list_all() for mem in all_memories: if calculate_memory_utility(mem) < threshold: await memory.archive(mem.id) """

Sharp Edges

Chunking Isolates Information From Its Context

Severity: CRITICAL

Situation: Processing documents for vector storage

Symptoms: Retrieval finds chunks but they don't make sense alone. Agent answers miss the big picture. "The function returns X" retrieved without knowing which function. References to "this" without knowing what "this" refers to.

Why this breaks: When we chunk for AI processing, we're breaking connections, reducing a holistic narrative to isolated fragments that often miss the big picture. A chunk about "the configuration" without context about what system is being configured is nearly useless.

Recommended fix:

Contextual Chunking (Anthropic's approach)

Add document context to each chunk before embedding

Reduces retrieval failures by 35%

def contextualize_chunk(chunk, document): summary = summarize(document)

# LLM generates context for chunk
context = llm.invoke(f'''
    Document summary: {summary}

    Generate a brief context statement for this chunk
    that would help someone understand what it refers to:

    {chunk}
''')

return f"{context}\n\n{chunk}"

Embed the contextualized version

for chunk in chunks: contextualized = contextualize_chunk(chunk, full_doc) embedding = embed(contextualized) # Store original chunk, embed contextualized store(original=chunk, embedding=embedding)

Hierarchical Chunking

Store at multiple granularities

chunks_small = split(doc, size=256) chunks_medium = split(doc, size=512) chunks_large = split(doc, size=1024)

Retrieve at appropriate level based on query

Chunk Size Mismatched to Query Patterns

Severity: HIGH

Situation: Configuring chunking for memory storage

Symptoms: High-quality documents produce low-quality retrievals. Simple questions miss relevant information. Complex questions get fragments instead of complete answers.

Why this breaks: Optimal chunk size depends on query patterns:

  • Factual queries need small, specific chunks
  • Conceptual queries need larger context
  • Code needs function-level boundaries

The sweet spot varies by document type and embedding model. Default 1000 characters works for nothing specific.

Recommended fix:

Test different sizes

from sklearn.metrics import recall_score

def evaluate_chunk_size(documents, test_queries, chunk_size): chunks = split_documents(documents, size=chunk_size) index = build_index(chunks)

correct_retrievals = 0
for query, expected_chunk in test_queries:
    results = index.search(query, k=5)
    if expected_chunk in results:
        correct_retrievals += 1

return correct_retrievals / len(test_queries)

Test multiple sizes

for size in [256, 512, 768, 1024]: recall = evaluate_chunk_size(docs, test_queries, size) print(f"Size {size}: Recall@5 = {recall:.2%}")

Size recommendations by content type

CHUNK_SIZES = {"documentation": 512, # Complete concepts "code": 1000, # Function-level "conversation": 256, # Turn-level "articles": 768, # Paragraph-level}

Use overlap to prevent boundary issues

splitter = RecursiveCharacterTextSplitter(chunk_size=512, chunk_overlap=50, # 10% overlap)

Semantic Search Returns Irrelevant Results

Severity: HIGH

Situation: Querying memory for context

Symptoms: Agent retrieves memories that seem related but aren't useful. "Tell me about the user's preferences" returns conversation about preferences in general, not this user's. High similarity scores for wrong content.

Why this breaks: Semantic similarity isn't the same as relevance. "The user likes Python" and "Python is a programming language" are semantically similar but very different types of information. Without metadata filtering, retrieval is just word matching.

Recommended fix:

Always filter by metadata first

Don't rely on semantic similarity alone

Bad: Only semantic search

results = index.query(vector=query_embedding, top_k=5)

Good: Filter then search

results = index.query(vector=query_embedding, filter={"user_id": current_user.id, "type": "preference", "created_after": cutoff_date,}, top_k=5)

Use hybrid search (semantic + keyword)

from qdrant_client import QdrantClient

client = QdrantClient(...)

Hybrid search with fusion

results = client.search(collection_name="memories", query_vector=semantic_embedding, query_text=query, # Also keyword match fusion={"method": "rrf"}, # Reciprocal Rank Fusion)

Rerank results with cross-encoder

from sentence_transformers import CrossEncoder

reranker = CrossEncoder("cross-encoder/ms-marco-MiniLM-L-6-v2")

Initial retrieval (recall-oriented)

candidates = index.query(query_embedding, top_k=20)

Rerank (precision-oriented)

pairs = [(query, c.text) for c in candidates] scores = reranker.predict(pairs) reranked = sorted(zip(candidates, scores), key=lambda x: x[1], reverse=True)

Old Memories Override Current Information

Severity: HIGH

Situation: User preferences or facts change over time

Symptoms: Agent uses outdated preferences. "User prefers dark mode" from 6 months ago overrides recent "switch to light mode" request. Agent confidently uses stale data.

Why this breaks: Vector stores don't have temporal awareness by default. A memory from a year ago has the same retrieval weight as one from today. Recent information should generally override old information for preferences and mutable facts.

Recommended fix:

Add temporal scoring

from datetime import datetime, timedelta

def time_decay_score(memory, half_life_days=30): age = (datetime.now() - memory.created_at).days decay = 0.5 ** (age / half_life_days) return decay

def retrieve_with_recency(query, user_id): # Get candidates candidates = index.query(vector=embed(query), filter={"user_id": user_id}, top_k=20)

# Apply time decay
for candidate in candidates:
    time_score = time_decay_score(candidate)
    candidate.final_score = candidate.similarity * 0.7 + time_score * 0.3

# Re-sort by final score
return sorted(candidates, key=lambda x: x.final_score, reverse=True)[:5]

Update instead of append for preferences

async def update_preference(user_id, category, value): # Delete old preference await memory.delete(filter={"user_id": user_id, "type": "preference", "category": category})

# Store new preference
await memory.upsert(
    id=f"pref-{user_id}-{category}",
    content={"category": category, "value": value},
    metadata={"updated_at": datetime.now()}
)

Explicit versioning for facts

await memory.upsert(id=f"fact-{fact_id}-v{version}", content=new_fact, metadata={"version": version, "supersedes": previous_id, "valid_from": datetime.now()})

Contradictory Memories Retrieved Together

Severity: MEDIUM

Situation: User has changed preferences or provided conflicting info

Symptoms: Agent retrieves "user prefers dark mode" and "user prefers light mode" in same context. Gives inconsistent answers. Seems confused or forgetful to user.

Why this breaks: Without conflict resolution, both old and new information coexist. Semantic search might return both because they're both about the same topic (preferences). Agent has no way to know which is current.

Recommended fix:

Detect conflicts on storage

async def store_with_conflict_check(memory, user_id): # Find potentially conflicting memories similar = await index.query(vector=embed(memory.content), filter={"user_id": user_id, "type": memory.type}, threshold=0.9, # Very similar top_k=5)

for existing in similar:
    if is_contradictory(memory.content, existing.content):
        # Ask for resolution
        resolution = await resolve_conflict(memory, existing)
        if resolution == "replace":
            await index.delete(existing.id)
        elif resolution == "version":
            await mark_superseded(existing.id, memory.id)

await index.upsert(memory)

Conflict detection heuristic

def is_contradictory(new_content, old_content): # Use LLM to detect contradiction result = llm.invoke(f''' Do these two statements contradict each other?

    Statement 1: {old_content}
    Statement 2: {new_content}

    Respond with just YES or NO.
''')
return result.strip().upper() == "YES"

Periodic consolidation

async def consolidate_memories(user_id): all_memories = await index.list(filter={"user_id": user_id}) clusters = cluster_by_topic(all_memories)

for cluster in clusters:
    if has_conflicts(cluster):
        resolved = await llm.invoke(f'''
            These memories may conflict. Create one consolidated
            memory that represents the current truth:
            {cluster}
        ''')
        await replace_cluster(cluster, resolved)

Retrieved Memories Exceed Context Window

Severity: MEDIUM

Situation: Retrieving too many memories at once

Symptoms: Token limit errors. Agent truncates important information. System prompt gets cut off. Retrieved memories compete with user query for space.

Why this breaks: Retrieval typically returns top-k results. If k is too high or chunks are too large, retrieved context overwhelms the window. Critical information (system prompt, recent messages) gets pushed out.

Recommended fix:

Budget tokens for different memory types

TOKEN_BUDGET = {"system_prompt": 500, "user_profile": 200, "recent_messages": 2000, "retrieved_memories": 1000, "current_query": 500, "buffer": 300, # Safety margin}

def budget_aware_retrieval(query, context_limit=4000): remaining = context_limit - TOKEN_BUDGET["system_prompt"] - TOKEN_BUDGET["buffer"]

# Prioritize recent messages
recent = get_recent_messages(limit=TOKEN_BUDGET["recent_messages"])
remaining -= count_tokens(recent)

# Then user profile
profile = get_user_profile(limit=TOKEN_BUDGET["user_profile"])
remaining -= count_tokens(profile)

# Finally retrieved memories with remaining budget
memories = retrieve_memories(query, max_tokens=remaining)

return build_context(profile, recent, memories)

Dynamic k based on chunk size

def retrieve_with_budget(query, max_tokens=1000): avg_chunk_tokens = 150 # From your data max_k = max_tokens // avg_chunk_tokens

results = index.query(query, top_k=max_k)

# Trim if still over budget
total_tokens = 0
filtered = []
for result in results:
    tokens = count_tokens(result.text)
    if total_tokens + tokens <= max_tokens:
        filtered.append(result)
        total_tokens += tokens
    else:
        break

return filtered

Query and Document Embeddings From Different Models

Severity: MEDIUM

Situation: Upgrading embedding model or mixing providers

Symptoms: Retrieval quality suddenly drops. Relevant documents not found. Random results returned. Works for new documents, fails for old.

Why this breaks: Embedding models produce different vector spaces. A query embedded with text-embedding-3 won't match documents embedded with text-ada-002. Mixing models creates garbage similarity scores.

Recommended fix:

Track embedding model in metadata

await index.upsert(id=doc_id, vector=embedding, metadata={"embedding_model": "text-embedding-3-small", "embedding_version": "2024-01", "content": content})

Filter by model version on retrieval

results = index.query(vector=query_embedding, filter={"embedding_model": current_model}, top_k=10)

Migration strategy for model upgrades

async def migrate_embeddings(old_model, new_model): # Get all documents with old model old_docs = await index.list(filter={"embedding_model": old_model})

for doc in old_docs:
    # Re-embed with new model
    new_embedding = await embed(doc.content, model=new_model)

    # Update in place
    await index.update(
        id=doc.id,
        vector=new_embedding,
        metadata={"embedding_model": new_model}
    )

Use separate collections during migration

Old collection: production queries

New collection: re-embedding in progress

Switch over when complete

Validation Checks

In-Memory Store in Production Code

Severity: ERROR

In-memory stores lose data on restart

Message: In-memory store detected. Use persistent storage (Postgres, Qdrant, Pinecone) for production.

Vector Upsert Without Metadata

Severity: WARNING

Vectors should have metadata for filtering

Message: Vector upsert without metadata. Add user_id, type, timestamp for proper filtering.

Query Without User Filtering

Severity: ERROR

Queries should filter by user to prevent data leakage

Message: Vector query without user filtering. Always filter by user_id to prevent data leakage.

Hardcoded Chunk Size Without Justification

Severity: INFO

Chunk size should be tested and justified

Message: Hardcoded chunk size. Test different sizes for your content type and measure retrieval accuracy.

Chunking Without Overlap

Severity: WARNING

Chunk overlap prevents boundary issues

Message: Text splitting without overlap. Add chunk_overlap (10-20%) to prevent boundary issues.

Semantic Search Without Filters

Severity: WARNING

Pure semantic search often returns irrelevant results

Message: Pure semantic search. Add metadata filters (user, type, time) for better relevance.

Retrieval Without Result Limit

Severity: WARNING

Unbounded retrieval can overflow context

Message: Retrieval without limit. Set top_k to prevent context overflow.

Embeddings Without Model Version Tracking

Severity: WARNING

Track embedding model to handle migrations

Message: Store embedding model version in metadata to handle model migrations.

Different Models for Document and Query Embedding

Severity: ERROR

Documents and queries must use same embedding model

Message: Ensure same embedding model for indexing and querying.

Collaboration

Delegation Triggers

  • user needs vector database at scale -> data-engineer (Production vector store operations)
  • user needs embedding model optimization -> ml-engineer (Custom embeddings, fine-tuning)
  • user needs knowledge graph -> knowledge-engineer (Graph-based memory structures)
  • user needs RAG pipeline -> llm-architect (End-to-end retrieval augmented generation)
  • user needs multi-agent shared memory -> multi-agent-orchestration (Memory sharing between agents)

Related Skills

Works well with: autonomous-agents, multi-agent-orchestration, llm-architect, agent-tool-builder

When to Use

  • User mentions or implies: agent memory
  • User mentions or implies: long-term memory
  • User mentions or implies: memory systems
  • User mentions or implies: remember across sessions
  • User mentions or implies: memory retrieval
  • User mentions or implies: episodic memory
  • User mentions or implies: semantic memory
  • User mentions or implies: vector store
  • User mentions or implies: rag
  • User mentions or implies: langmem
  • User mentions or implies: memgpt
  • User mentions or implies: conversation history

Limitations

  • Use this skill only when the task clearly matches the scope described above.
  • Do not treat the output as a substitute for environment-specific validation, testing, or expert review.
  • Stop and ask for clarification if required inputs, permissions, safety boundaries, or success criteria are missing.

平台分布

Claude Code

32.68%
按下载量换算3,365

OpenCode

23.22%
按下载量换算2,391

Antigravity

17.75%
按下载量换算1,828

Gemini CLI

12.04%
按下载量换算1,240

Cursor

8.09%
按下载量换算833

Codex

3.29%
按下载量换算339

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。

继续浏览同类 Skills