技能潮 SkillTide 提交收录
官方说明7 个来源MCP 服务8 天前
vornicx/Midas

vornicx/Midas

Local-first long-horizon agent memory: source-trace
在 GitHub 查看 ↗直链 · 无中转页
配置模板(请按你的客户端调整)
claude mcp add midas -- npx -y midas
这是根据仓库名生成的可粘贴骨架,命令行参数与包名请以该项目 README 为准。
★ 数取值
15 ★ · vornicx/Midas · 取自该仓库的 GitHub 页面 · (2026-10-16 20:00:20 核对)
来源明细
收录自 punkpeye/awesome-mcp-servers 榜单(我们从中收集的条目之一) · 条目类型:MCP 服务
收录与活跃
收录于 2026-10-09 · 最近见到 2026-10-16 · 共见到 32 次 · 被 7 个来源列出
评分构成
综合分 703 · 15 ★ · 7 个来源 · mcp
常见问题(答案都来自我们的记录)
怎么安装?
我们【没有】从该仓库取到安装命令(我们的 install 覆盖率只有约 4%)。请看它的 README 或 releases 页。
它适合谁 / 用来做什么?
我们把它归在这些标签下: MCP 服务。标签来自条目自身,不是我们强加的分类。
谁维护它、还在更新吗?
仓库 vornicx/Midas;我们收录于 2026-10-09;最近见到 2026-10-16。这里没有"官方认证"或"质量评级"——我们只记录来源与时间。
第三方质量标记

Midas

以下摘录自该仓库的 README(片段) · 在 GitHub 读完整 README →

The local memory layer for long-horizon AI agents — remembers across sessions, keeps what's current, and won't act on stale memory. No LLM at ingest · $0 per message · fully local · every recall traces to its source.
Your AI assistant forgets everything between sessions. **Midas is the memory that lives next to it, on
your machine.** Your coding agent remembers the decisions, conventions, and bugs from three sessions
ago — without piping every message through an LLM to "extract" facts. It costs **nothing per message**,
**nothing leaves your computer**, every memory **traces back to the exact turn it came from**, and it
**won't let an agent act on memory that's stale or never confirmed**.
Install in your agent
·
See the benchmarks
·
Complete overview
·
Roadmap
---
Why Midas
Most memory tools call an LLM to summarize every session — so you pay in tokens forever, add latency,
ship every turn to a provider, and get back *rewritten* facts you can't audit. Midas makes the opposite
bet, and that bet is what makes it cheap, private, and trustworthy:
- **$0 and private by construction.** No LLM at ingest or query → no API spend, nothing leaves your
machine, fast local ops (~tens of ms, no per-turn network round-trip).
- **You can trust what it recalls.** Recall returns the **verbatim source turn**, not an LLM rewrite —
so there's no extraction step that can silently hallucinate a "fact" you never said.
- **It stays current on its own.** Typed belief revision supersedes the old value instead of piling up
duplicates; selective forgetting keeps it bounded — all with no LLM.
- **It's safe to build on.** A provenance **guard** lets memory inform planning but **blocks
memory-justified external or destructive actions** unless you explicitly confirmed them — and a
*superseded* memory can't authorize an action at all.
- **One file, many tools.** Point Claude Code, Cursor, and your chat app at one SQLite file and they
share one live memory.
- **Proven, not asserted.** Every claim has a reproducible benchmark — *including the experiments that
failed.*
How Midas compares
Every Midas number below is measured and reproducible from this repo; the LLM-at-ingest column
reflects the structural properties of that design class (Mem0, Zep, Hindsight) and the figures
documented in BENCHMARKS.md.
| | **Midas** | LLM-at-ingest systems (Mem0, Zep, Hindsight) |
|---|---|---|
| LLM calls at ingest | **0** | ≥1 per session |
| Cost per message | **$0** | per-token API spend, forever |
| Data egress at ingest | **None** | every turn leaves the box |
| Ingest latency | **~16–116 ms**, local, embed-bound | ~668 ms + API round-trip |
| Recall returns | **verbatim source turn**, traceable | LLM-rewritten facts (source recall@k not computable) |
| Deterministic & reproducible | **yes — every number, one command** | no |
| Works fully offline | **yes** (measured end-to-end with a local Ollama reader) | no |
| LongMemEval-s judged answer (gpt-4o) | **0.84** | 0.84 — Observational Memory, with LLM ingest |
| Whole-conversation aggregation / summarization | ❌ **by design** — top-k retrieval can't cover it (documented) | ✅ their structural edge |
The last row is deliberate: Midas trades whole-conversation abilities for $0, privacy, and
auditability, and publishes the measurements that show exactly where that trade bites.
More than recall: a memory you can govern
Finding a buried fact is table stakes. A long-horizon coding agent needs memory it can **act on
safely** and **resume from cleanly** — which is where similarity search alone falls short:
| You ask… | Midas answers with | Why top-k recall can't |
|---|---|---|
| *"Can I run this destructive migration?"* | **Guard**: allowed only if **you** confirmed it, and only if that confirmation is still current | provenance + currency aren't a similarity match |
| *"What's the current state of project Apollo?"* | **memory_state**: the live, non-superseded decisions / constraints / facts | a broad "current state" query matches no single turn |
| *"What changed since our last session?"* | **memory_diff**: beliefs added, and beliefs revised (old → new) | "what's new" isn't a content query at all |
| *"How do I speed up the transactions list?"* | the **prior fix** resurfaces, so the agent doesn't re-diagnose it | — |
来源
awesome · https://github.com/vornicx/Midas
按领域浏览
MCP 服务
Traction
15 ★
收录于
昨天

更多MCP 服务

查看MCP 服务全部 5,525 条 →

所属领域与标签

每个标签都能点进去看同类的全部条目。数字是当前库里的真实条数。

浏览全部领域 →

← 返回索引