Skip to main content

Documentation Index

Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.mnemom.ai/llms.txt

Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

The cards API ships four AI-forward verbs that make manifest authoring self-serve. They wrap the platform’s existing capabilities — LLM, policy engine, observer — and surface them through care-framed HTTP endpoints.
VerbEndpointWhat it does
scaffoldPOST /v1/<resource>/scaffoldNatural-language description → starting-point manifest YAML + reasoning.
explainPOST /v1/<resource>/<scope>/<id>/explain”Why did the policy engine flag this?” Returns structured trace + remediations.
simulatePOST /v1/<resource>/<scope>/<id>/simulateDry-run gateway + observer against a hypothetical tool call.
tools/importPOST /v1/tools/importBulk preview from OpenAPI 3.0+ spec or Polis YAML manifest.
All four are read-style POSTs. They don’t mutate state, so they don’t take Idempotency-Key or If-Match. They’re idempotent by construction.

​
scaffold — natural language to a manifest

You describe what you want; the platform writes the starting manifest. 
curl -X POST https://api.mnemom.ai/v1/alignment/scaffold \
  -H "X-Mnemom-Api-Key: $MNEMOM_API_KEY" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{
    "description": "A finance agent that reads invoices, drafts payment summaries, and posts to a treasury Slack channel — never executes payments itself",
    "scope": "agent",
    "hints": {
      "industry": "finance",
      "risk_appetite": "conservative"
    }
  }'
Response: 
{
  "ok": true,
  "resource": "alignment",
  "manifest": "card_version: \"unified/2026-04-26\"\nagent_id: \"<placeholder>\"\nautonomy_mode: observe\n...",
  "reasoning": "This manifest covers a finance agent that depends on read-only access to invoices and outbound communication. The agent's principal would benefit from a `delegated_authority` relationship — payments are an irreversible external write and stay outside the agent's autonomy. Two values are declared: `alignment_with_principal_objective` and `policy_attentiveness` with `domain: financial`. The audit retention is 90 days reflecting finance-domain norms.",
  "suggested_catalog_entries": ["alignment_with_principal_objective", "policy_attentiveness", "deliberation_before_action"],
  "coverage_gaps": [],
  "cached": false,
  "model": "claude-haiku-4-5-20251001"
}
  • manifest — editable YAML. Run it through PUT /v1/alignment/<scope>/<id> to commit, or hand it to the mnemom/cards-action for PR review.
  • reasoning — care-framed prose explaining the choices.
  • suggested_catalog_entries — values the model would recommend; consider them, then accept or adjust.
  • coverage_gaps — primitives the model thinks would benefit from operator attention.
  • cached — true when the response was served from the description-hash cache (24h TTL).
See the scaffold guide for the full authoring flow.

​
explain — why did the policy engine flag this?

You ask “what’s wrong with this agent’s spec?”; the platform runs the policy engine and translates the structured findings into prose you can act on. 
curl -X POST https://api.mnemom.ai/v1/alignment/agent/smolt-512448e7/explain \
  -H "X-Mnemom-Api-Key: $MNEMOM_API_KEY" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{}'
Response: 
{
  "ok": true,
  "resource": "alignment",
  "trace": {
    "verdict": "warn",
    "violations": [],
    "warnings": [
      {"type": "unmapped_tool", "tool": "filesystem_read", "reason": "..."}
    ],
    "card_gaps": [],
    "coverage": { "coverage_pct": 92, "total_card_actions": 13, "mapped_card_actions": [...] }
  },
  "reasoning": "The alignment policy evaluation completed in 2ms with verdict `warn`. 1 warning present. Coverage: 92% of the agent's declared actions map to capabilities (12/13).",
  "suggested_remediations": [
    {
      "for": "warning",
      "index": 0,
      "remediation": "Mapping `filesystem_read` to a capability would replace this warning with explicit coverage. Run `PATCH /v1/alignment/agent/smolt-512448e7/capabilities`.",
      "method": "PATCH",
      "url": "/v1/alignment/agent/smolt-512448e7/capabilities"
    }
  ],
  "enriched": false
}
Each remediation carries a method + url hint that points at the sub-resource verb that would resolve it. Care-framing throughout — the prose uses “would benefit from”, “depends on”, “would close this gap” rather than compliance language. Set "enrich": true in the body to call the LLM and expand the structured remediations into long-form prose (off by default; rate-limited). See the explain guide for the full debug-and-fix flow.

​
simulate — dry-run before you commit

You describe a hypothetical tool call; the platform runs the gateway and observer evaluators against the agent’s current spec and tells you whether the call would be allowed. 
curl -X POST https://api.mnemom.ai/v1/alignment/agent/smolt-512448e7/simulate \
  -H "X-Mnemom-Api-Key: $MNEMOM_API_KEY" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{
    "candidate_tool_call": {
      "tool_name": "campfire_send_message",
      "tool_args": {"channel": "treasury", "message": "..."}
    }
  }'
Response: 
{
  "ok": true,
  "resource": "alignment",
  "allowed": "conditional",
  "conditions": ["receipt:think needed before invoking `campfire_send_message`"],
  "suggestions": ["Run the `think` consultation first, then retry — the gateway hook would clear."],
  "gateway_decision": {
    "verdict": "warn",
    "violations": [],
    "warnings": [],
    "missing_receipts": ["think"]
  },
  "observer_assessment": {
    "verdict": "pass",
    "violations": [],
    "warnings": []
  },
  "evaluated_at": "2026-05-21T18:42:13Z"
}
allowed is one of:
  • "true" — both gateway and observer pass with no conditions.
  • "false" — at least one verdict is fail.
  • "conditional" — passes but requires a receipt or carries warnings. The conditions[] array names what’s needed.
Use this before you commit a manifest change, or to test whether a specific tool call would clear the policy. See the simulate guide for the full pre-commit workflow.

​
tools/import — bulk preview from OpenAPI or YAML

You point the endpoint at an OpenAPI 3.0+ spec or a Polis-style tool manifest; the platform walks the operations, extracts proposed tool definitions, and LLM-infers the class + domain for each. 
curl -X POST https://api.mnemom.ai/v1/tools/import \
  -H "X-Mnemom-Api-Key: $MNEMOM_PLATFORM_ADMIN_KEY" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{
    "format": "openapi",
    "source": "url",
    "url": "https://api.github.com/openapi.yaml",
    "infer_class_domain": true
  }'
Response: 
{
  "ok": true,
  "imported": [
    {
      "name": "github_create_issue",
      "class": "internal_write",
      "domain": "engineering",
      "description": "Create a new GitHub issue",
      "schema": {...},
      "confidence": 0.92,
      "from_path": "/repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues",
      "from_method": "POST"
    }
  ],
  "inferred_class_domain": {
    "github_create_issue": { "class": "internal_write", "domain": "engineering", "confidence": 0.92 }
  },
  "conflicts": [],
  "commit_url": "POST /v1/tools",
  "preview_token": "tools-import:..."
}
The preview never auto-commits — you iterate imported[] and write each tool individually via POST /v1/tools. Platform-admin only. See the bulk import guide for the full ingest-and-confirm workflow.

​
Rate limits

LLM-backed verbs (scaffold and tools/import-with-inference) share a per-principal budget:
WindowDefaultOverride
Per user10 calls/hourLLM_USER_HOURLY_CAP env var
Per org100 calls/hourLLM_ORG_HOURLY_CAP env var
On exceed: 429 Too Many Requests with a Retry-After header and a care-framed body. explain and simulate are pure-sync (no LLM by default); they don’t consume the LLM budget unless you pass "enrich": true.

​
Care-framed by construction

Every customer-facing string in the response surface — error messages, reasoning prose, suggested remediations — is asserted by the platform’s care-framing test to avoid compliance vocabulary (Blocked / Denied / Required / Forbidden / Violation / Must). The replacement vocabulary is would benefit from, depends on, run X then retry, you’d be supported by. LLM-generated prose runs through a post-check that swaps any slips automatically.

​
Cache + freshness

scaffold and tools/import-with-inference cache LLM responses by hash of the input. Identical inputs return identical outputs without burning the LLM budget. Cache TTLs:
  • scaffold: 24 hours (description-hash → manifest + reasoning)
  • tools/import inference: 7 days (tool_name + method + path + tags → class + domain inference)
explain and simulate are not cached — they consume live spec state.