原型 · 预览版:收录官方注册中心里的全部服务器,每 30 分钟同步一次。评价和账户功能将在后续阶段推出。
PopNx MCP为使用 AI 的人准备的 MCP 服务器 · 用大白话讲清楚

MemoryBrain

作者:Memory-brain版本 0.9.0i★ –i在云端运行
注册名称ai.memorybrain/memorybrain

安装

概览

作者提供的说明(英文原文)

Your own memory inside ChatGPT and Claude, with the source of every note.

PopNx MCP 的三大支柱

这三项永远不会合并成一个分数:意见、测量和人气是不同的东西。

它能帮你做什么

我们还没有为它写通俗的介绍。下面是我们从注册中心读取到的事实。

  • 连接方式: 在云端运行
  • 传输方式: Streamable HTTP
  • 分类: 搜索与 AI 记忆

安装

选择你使用的 AI 应用,然后复制设置。

安装之前

你需要

你用的是哪个应用?

在上方选择你的应用。我们会记住它,下次按钮会显示“安装到 …”。

适用于网页版、桌面版和手机版 Claude:

  1. 打开 Settings → Connectors
  2. 点击 Add custom connector
  3. 粘贴下面的地址,然后点击 Add
  4. 如果要求登录,请登录作者的服务
SettingsConnectors1+ Add2https://…3
https://app.memorybrain.ai/mcp

在终端中运行这条命令

claude mcp add --transport http memorybrain https://app.memorybrain.ai/mcp

在 Cursor 中打开

或者自己复制设置

粘贴到项目中的 .cursor/mcp.json,或 ~/.cursor/mcp.json

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "memorybrain": {
      "url": "https://app.memorybrain.ai/mcp"
    }
  }
}

浏览器会先询问是否打开应用,然后应用会显示设置并请你确认。密钥的值会留空,由你自己填写。

在 VS Code 中打开

或者自己复制设置

粘贴到项目中的 .vscode/mcp.json

{
  "servers": {
    "memorybrain": {
      "type": "http",
      "url": "https://app.memorybrain.ai/mcp"
    }
  }
}

浏览器会先询问是否打开应用,然后应用会显示设置并请你确认。密钥的值会留空,由你自己填写。

ChatGPT 只能连接互联网上的服务器:

  1. 打开网页版 ChatGPT → Settings → Connectors (Apps)
  2. 点击 Create 或 Add(部分套餐需要先在 Advanced 中开启 Developer mode)
  3. 粘贴下面的地址,起个名字,然后保存
  4. 如果要求登录,请登录作者的服务
SettingsConnectors1+ Create2https://…3
https://app.memorybrain.ai/mcp

菜单名称可能因套餐和版本不同而略有差异。

你的选择通过 Cookie 保存在这台设备上,无需账户。

这些设置是根据作者在注册中心的条目生成的。如果 README 的写法不同,请以 README 为准。

它能做什么

服务器要求先登录,才会列出它的工具。

基础检查i

我们检查的是任何人都能看到的信息;我们没有阅读代码。不适用的检查项不计入总数。 · 检查于 2026年11月8日

  • ✓ 通过

    作者与仓库一致

    注册名称已通过域名 memorybrain.ai 验证(注册中心会核实域名所有权)

  • … 尚未检查

    仍在维护

    我们还没有从 GitHub 读取这个仓库

  • … 尚未检查

    有许可证

    我们还没有从 GitHub 读取这个仓库

  • ✓ 通过

    端点有响应

    在 89 毫秒内响应(HTTP 401)

  • ✓ 通过

    使用 OAuth 登录

    声明支持 OAuth 登录,你的 AI 应用可以带你去登录

  • … 尚未检查

    工具描述中没有隐藏指令

    尚未检查;我们会在检查端点时读取工具列表

与“搜索与 AI 记忆”中的其他服务器比较i

  • 星标数多于此分类中其他 5676 个服务器的 0%
  • 发布到注册中心的时间比此分类中其他 5676 个服务器的 99% 更新
  • 基础检查结果等于或优于此分类中其他 5676 个服务器的 100%

与注册中心里这个分类中所有活跃的服务器比较。只有当发布者拥有该仓库时,星标数才计入。

常见问题

MemoryBrain 安全吗?

它在 3 项适用的基础检查中通过了 3 项。我们没有阅读代码。在添加密钥或令牌之前,请先看看这个服务器要求哪些权限,并使用只具备所需权限的密钥。

它需要哪些密钥或代码?

注册中心没有列出必需的密钥,不过有些服务器会在首次使用时要求你登录。

它在我的电脑上运行还是在云端?

它在作者的云端运行。通过互联网连接,无需安装,但你发送的内容会经过作者的服务器。

它还在维护吗?

GitHub 仓库最后更新于–,最新版本(0.9.0)于今天进入注册中心。

哪些应用可以使用它?

支持 MCP 的应用,例如 Claude Desktop、Claude Code、Cursor 和 VS Code。它通过 URL 连接,所以接受远程 MCP 服务器的应用也可以使用,例如开启开发者模式的 ChatGPT。

有什么可以替代它?

同一分类中有:Context7, Codebase Memory, Exa

替代选择

同一分类中其他作者的服务器,按星标数排序。

如何看卡片:★ GitHub 星标i三大支柱:评价 · 检查 · 使用情况i更新 = 最新版本发布到注册中心的时间i

Context7

作者:upstash

Up-to-date docs for AI agents

电脑或云端★ 64,224MIT昨天更新
安装

Codebase Memory

作者:DeusData

Codebase knowledge graph for AI agents — 162 languages, sub-ms queries, 99% fewer tokens.

在你的电脑上运行★ 48,148MIT21天前更新
安装

Exa

作者:exa-labs

Connect AI agents to Exa for web search, content fetching, and multi-step research.

在云端运行★ 5,213MIT2个月前更新
安装

作者的 README

打开 README

按原文从作者的仓库复制。PopNx MCP 没有审查或背书其内容。HTML、图片和脚本已被移除。链接会离开本站。

Open Brain — A Knowledge Management Framework

Open Brain is an opinionated framework for building and maintaining personal knowledge vaults that stay useful as they scale. It addresses the core problem most PKM systems ignore: notes don't just need to be captured — they need to be found, connected, kept alive, tested, and turned into output.

[MemoryBrain](https://memorybrain.ai) is built on Open Brain. Open Brain defines how a brain is built; MemoryBrain is where it lives inside your AIs (ChatGPT and Claude, through a remote MCP connector). The skills are listed at memorybrain.ai/openbrain/skills.

Most knowledge management systems work well at 50 notes. At 500, search gets noisy. At 2,000+, the vault becomes a graveyard of ideas you know you wrote down but can't surface when you need them. And at every scale, without active recall and deliberate output, the knowledge never becomes skill.

Open Brain addresses this with a structured approach across eight modules — from first capture through to written thinking and system automation. The repo has two parts:

  • `docs/` — 46 problem/solution docs that explain the framework. They are tool-agnostic.
  • `skills/` — 23 Claude Code skills that implement it on a Markdown vault (see Skills).
  • `engines/` — the Python scripts those skills call for the deterministic work: graph, retrieval log, health checks, lint, course build.

Some parts of the framework are practices you run by hand rather than features a skill runs for you — publishing, measuring how much your vault improves an output, and mining your own sessions for automation. The docs say so where it applies.


Try it in two minutes

example-vault/ is a small vault: 33 notes built from two invented books. Everything in it is fictional. It contains six deliberately seeded defects, so you can see what the engines catch and what they miss. You don't need a vault of your own or Claude Code: only Python 3.9+.

git clone https://github.com/Memory-brain/open-brain.git

cd open-brain pip install pyyaml # optional; without it one informational check reports 0 python3 engines/health-engine/health_check.py self-test bash example-vault/run-demo.sh

run-demo.sh copies the vault to a temporary directory, runs five engines there and deletes the copy afterwards, so nothing is written into the repo. The five engines are autolink (typed graph), the health check, the enrich scan, a one-hop graph retrieval and the eval. The excerpt below is real output from 2026-10-14, trimmed: … marks a cut, and checks that reported 0 are left out of the summary.

== 1. Autolink: index the vault and build the typed graph ==

✅ Indexed 33 notes → entities.json ✅ Wrote 130 edges → graph.jsonl … 🔖 Index edges (frontmatter): 97 🎯 Signal/noise ratio: 54.5% (18/33 non-trivial claim edges)

== 2. Health check (deterministic checks) == "summary": { "Orphan Notes": 1, "Unprocessed Inbox (>30d)": 1, "Contradiction Scan": 1, "skill_sequence Adoption & Signal": 3, "PN Provenance (resolved sources:)": 1, "Description as Claim, Not Label": 2, … -- details of the checks that fired -- [1] Orphan Notes: count=1 items: ["Small teams beat large teams on ambiguous work"] [5] Unprocessed Inbox (>30d): count=1 items: [{"note": "The Quiet Standup", "days": 63, "rating": 3}] [12] Contradiction Scan: count=1 items: [{"a": "A new routine sticks when it is small enough to run on a bad day", "b": "Judge a practice by its weekly review, not by its daily streak", "type": "contradice", …}] [16] Search Term Crowding: count=0 yellow_top: [{"term": "Habit Formation", "tag_count": 12, "tier": "flat", "threshold": 20, …}] [36] PN Provenance (resolved sources:): count=1 single_author_items: [{"pn": "Small teams beat large teams on ambiguous work", "author": "dov hartigan", "sources": 2}] [46] Description as Claim, Not Label: count=2 topic_not_claim: {"total": 1, "sample": ["Literature Notes/TF - A fixed weekly rhythm makes a small team pred"]}

== 3. Enrich scan (notes under 3 specific, resolvable search terms) == "under_threshold": [ { "note": "SL - A broken streak predicts dropout more than a missed day", "specific_resolvable": 2, … == 4. Retrieval: one-hop graph expansion from a seed note == Score Edge Type Dir Seed Neighbor 5.0 contradice → Judge a practice by its weekly review, n A new routine sticks when it is small enough to ru 1.0 refuerza → Judge a practice by its weekly review, n Team rituals need an owner and a cue, not just a c 1.0 refuerza ← Judge a practice by its weekly review, n Restarting an evening reading habit after a broken

== 5. Eval (L1 metrics across six dimensions) == "integrity": { "frontmatter_compliance_pct": 100.0, … "broken_links": 0, "orphan_pns": 1, … "graph": { "total_edges": 130, "total_entities": 33, "edges_per_entity": 3.94, "signal_noise_ratio_pct": 54.5, … "pipeline": { "inbox_total": 3, "inbox_stale_30d": 1,

Of the six seeded defects, four are caught and one is caught only in part:

  • Caught: the stale Inbox item, the orphan Permanent Note, the topic-style description and the Literature Note with only two search terms.
  • Caught in part: the crowded term Habit Formation. It shows up in the yellow band (12 notes), but the check's count stays 0 because a flat term only counts as red above 20 notes.
  • Missed: a broken wikilink inside a Literature Note. Broken-link checks only scan Permanent Notes.

example-vault/README.md lists each defect, where it is and which check is expected to catch it. Edge types in the graph keep their original Spanish identifiers: contradice = contradicts, refuerza = reinforces, extiende = extends.


The Eight Modules

Module 1: Knowledge Enrichment

The foundation. Addresses the three failures that compound as a vault grows: notes becoming unfindable, search terms losing discriminative power, and knowledge connections carrying no semantic meaning.

Problems:

  • Retrieval Decay — Notes become progressively harder to find as your vocabulary evolves
  • Term Saturation — When a search term accumulates so many notes it loses discriminative power
  • Knowledge Graph Signal vs. Noise — Why generic "mentions" links make the graph useless

Solution:

  • The Enrichment Pattern — Evidence-driven search term repair, term splitting, and typed connections between Permanent Notes

Module 2: Knowledge Extraction

How raw sources — books, articles, PDFs, web content — become atomic, structured notes. The quality of extraction determines the quality of everything downstream. Includes both passive extraction (from sources you read) and active research (filling gaps you identify).

Problems:

  • Source Overwhelm — The unprocessed inbox: capture without extraction is organized procrastination
  • Atomic Note Decomposition — Getting the granularity right when converting a book to notes
  • The Re-reading Trap — When your notes fail as references and you keep returning to the original
  • Reactive Knowledge Accumulation — When the vault only reflects what you happened to read, not what you need to know
  • The Seven Extraction Layers — What a source contains, why slotting notes into layers was retired from extraction, and where layers survive (the layer field on Permanent Notes)

Solutions:

  • The Extraction Pipeline — Ingest → Extract → Index, with an admission gate before extraction
  • The Autonomous Research Loop — Filling knowledge gaps through targeted multi-round web research (a practice)

Module 3: Knowledge Maturation

How captured notes become your own ideas. The promotion process that separates storage from understanding.

Problems:

  • The Literature Note Graveyard — 500 notes from 20 books, but no original positions
  • Premature Synthesis — Building theses on thin evidence before sufficient convergence
  • Domain Blindness — Not knowing what you know or what you're missing in a field
  • Convergence Detection — Why two independent sources confirming an idea beat ten that merely mention it
  • The Endorsement Gap — The difference between a note that exists in your vault and one you have explicitly approved

Solutions:

  • The Maturation Ladder — Literature Note → Your Extension → Convergence → Permanent Note → Domain Synthesis, with maturity (seed → growing → evergreen) derived from use afterwards
  • Convergence Promotion — The 4-part convergence test, the per-cluster extension gate, and the state machine from draft to endorsed (plus visual pattern promotion)

Module 4: Active Recall & Practice

How knowledge becomes skill. The practice layer that closes the gap between understanding and doing.

Problems:

  • The Collector's Fallacy — When saving notes feels like learning but produces no retention
  • Skill Stagnation — The gap between understanding a concept and actually doing it well
  • Invisible Progress — Learning without a feedback loop: you don't know if you're improving
  • Course Gate Design — Why linear reading produces recognition but not generation or transfer
  • Context-Absent Output — When AI generates answers without grounding in your actual knowledge
  • The Judgment Gap — The distance between knowing about X and having developed judgment on X
  • Empty Prompting — Using AI as a content dispenser without building judgment: outputs accumulate, capability stays flat

Solutions:

  • The AI-Driven Creation Loop — Delegate → Elevate → Challenge as a practice you run by hand, and the loop the skills run: practice log → gaps and friction → promotion review → next course
  • The Specificity Delta — Comparing an output made without your vault against one made with it (a manual comparison)
  • The Learning Science of Courses — The research behind the course design
  • Three-Gate Progression — Vocabulary → Production → Transfer, scored after the course by a separate evaluation step

Module 5: Knowledge Retrieval

How to access what you know — in multiple modes, for different purposes, from any context.

Problems:

  • The Search Box Bottleneck — Why text search degrades as the primary retrieval method for complex knowledge
  • Isolated Retrieval — Finding individual notes without following the reasoning thread connecting them
  • Knowledge Portability — When your vault is stranded on your laptop and inaccessible everywhere else

Solution:

  • Multi-Modal Retrieval — Six intents (including a visual track), a query-expansion gate, one-hop graph traversal, and remote access as a read-only search-and-read pattern

Module 6: Vault Health & Maintenance

How to keep a

只显示了开头部分;其余内容请在仓库中阅读

问 PopNx