agent memory should probably have verbs, not just storage

I keep seeing agent memory framed as a storage problem: vector DB, markdown files, MCP, bigger context, better reranker, etc. I think that framing keeps missing the annoying part. The hard question is not just "can the agent retrieve this later?" It is more like: what is this memory allowed to do when it comes back? A stale plan should not have the same force as a fresh decision. A guess should not come back dressed as a fact. A temporary task note should not become permanent personality. A correction should be able to demote the thing it corrected. That is where a lot of memory systems start feeling weird to me. They remember more, but the memories all come back with the same kind of authority, so the agent gets more confident and less grounded at the same time. The version I keep coming back to is memory with typed roles and lifecycle: - facts can inform - open tasks can pull attention - corrections can weaken old traces - decisions can constrain future plans - temporary context can expire Maybe the storage layer matters less than the verbs attached to the memory. If "memory" is just retrieved text, the model still has to decide what that text means. If memory has a role, source, freshness, and authority level, the agent has a fighting chance of not treating every old note like gospel. Curious if people here are solving this with explicit state machines, graph memory, versioned notes, event logs, or just accepting that the model has to reason it out at runtime.