docs: rewrite memory-lifecycle.md to reflect actual server-controlled implementation #66
Conversation
… implementation - Remove client-controlled forgetting APIs that don't exist - Document background task system using Docket - Clarify server autonomy over memory lifecycle management - Update configuration examples to match actual implementation - Add best practices for robust client design Co-authored-by: Andrew Brookins <abrookins@users.noreply.github.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull Request Overview
This PR fixes critical discrepancies between the documentation and the actual implementation by rewriting the memory lifecycle documentation to accurately reflect the server-controlled memory management system.
- Removed non-existent client-controlled forgetting APIs and replaced with server-side background process documentation
- Added comprehensive coverage of the Docket-based background task system for memory lifecycle operations
- Updated configuration examples and client usage patterns to match the actual implementation
Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.
docs/memory-lifecycle.md
Outdated
| for i in range(0, len(memory_ids), batch_size): | ||
| batch_ids = memory_ids[i:i + batch_size] | ||
| await client.delete_memories(batch_ids) | ||
| await client.delete_long_term_memories(batch_ids) # Correct method name |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[nitpick] The comment 'Correct method name' should be removed as it's not providing value to readers and appears to be a note from the documentation rewrite process.
docs/memory-lifecycle.md
Outdated
| memory_ids = [mem.id for mem in topic_memories.memories] | ||
| if memory_ids: | ||
| await client.delete_memories(memory_ids) | ||
| await client.delete_long_term_memories(memory_ids) # Correct method name |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[nitpick] The comment 'Correct method name' should be removed as it's not providing value to readers and appears to be a note from the documentation rewrite process.
| else: | ||
| return get_default_preference(preference_key) | ||
| # Bad: Assuming specific memories will always exist |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The commented code example references get_memory_by_id() method which may not exist in the actual API. Consider using a method that's documented elsewhere in the codebase or clarify that this is a hypothetical example.
| # Bad: Assuming specific memories will always exist | |
| # Bad: Assuming specific memories will always exist | |
| # Hypothetical: get_memory_by_id() does not exist in the real API |
|
@claude Tighten the language in this PR: no need to reinforce that forgetting is “not controlled by the client.” Just talk about how it works. |
|
Claude finished @abrookins's task —— View job Tasks
Changes MadeTightened the language throughout the memory lifecycle documentation: Key improvements:
Examples of changes:
The documentation now focuses on how the system works rather than what it doesn't allow, making it more actionable and less defensive. |
- Remove unnecessary reinforcement about client control limitations
- Focus on positive descriptions of how the system works
- Clean up leftover editing comments ('Correct method name')
- Address review feedback for cleaner, more direct language
Co-authored-by: Andrew Brookins <abrookins@users.noreply.github.com>
|
@claude Fix the linting and make sure you use "pre-commit" |
|
Claude finished @abrookins's task —— View job Claude finished @abrookins's task —— View job Tasks
Changes MadeSuccessfully fixed linting issues and ensured pre-commit compliance: Linting fixes applied:
Pre-commit hooks verified:
The documentation is now properly formatted and all automated code quality checks are passing. The commit includes the fixes and has been pushed to the PR branch. |
- Remove trailing whitespace from multiple lines - Apply code formatting with ruff - Ensure all pre-commit hooks pass Co-authored-by: Andrew Brookins <abrookins@users.noreply.github.com>
This PR fixes discrepancies between the memory lifecycle documentation and the actual implementation.
Changes
Closes #65
Generated with Claude Code