Summary

active-memory appears to still allowlist the legacy memory tool names memory_search / memory_get, while the bundled memory-lancedb backend exposes memory_recall / memory_store / memory_forget.

In practice this makes bundled active-memory incompatible with bundled memory-lancedb unless the installed code is patched locally.

This looks like an OpenClaw integration bug between two bundled plugins, not a third-party plugin issue.

Environment

• OpenClaw: 2026.4.25
• Install: npm/global install on Linux x64
• Active memory plugin: bundled active-memory
• Memory backend: bundled memory-lancedb

Observed behavior

With memory-lancedb configured as the memory backend, active-memory fails its recall path because it appears to request or allowlist the stale tool names:

• memory_search
• memory_get

But the actual tool surface available from the LanceDB backend is:

• memory_recall
• memory_store
• memory_forget

A local patch replacing:

["memory_search", "memory_get"]

with:

["memory_recall"]

in:

/home/ubuntu/.npm-global/lib/node_modules/openclaw/dist/extensions/active-memory/index.js

was required to make the integration line up.

Expected behavior

If active-memory is intended to work with bundled memory-lancedb, it should use the current memory runtime/tool contract exposed by that backend, rather than stale legacy tool names.

At minimum, bundled plugins should not ship with incompatible built-in defaults.

Why this seems like a core bug

Both sides are bundled OpenClaw components:

• bundled active-memory
• bundled memory-lancedb

So if one ships expecting memory_search / memory_get and the other ships exposing memory_recall, that is an upstream integration regression/drift inside OpenClaw.

Related symptoms

This may also explain or contribute to:

• active-memory recall failures
• timeouts/skips in the recall path
• confusing diagnosis when memory-lancedb itself is otherwise functional

Reproduction steps

1. Install OpenClaw 2026.4.25
2. Configure memory-lancedb as the active memory backend
3. Enable bundled active-memory
4. Start the gateway and trigger a conversation where active-memory should perform recall
5. Observe that the active-memory path appears to rely on stale legacy memory tool names rather than the current LanceDB tool surface

Suggested fix

Audit the bundled active-memory integration against the current memory runtime contract used by bundled memory-lancedb, and update the allowlist/tool selection accordingly.

It would also be worth checking for any other stale references to:

• memory_search
• memory_get

inside the bundled active-memory pipeline.