MEMORY.md vs ClawVault: Which Memory Approach Should You Use?

MEMORY.md is a great starting point.

But as your agent workflow grows, you may need more than one evolving text file.

MEMORY.md: Where It Shines

Use MEMORY.md when:

• The project is small
• The team is one or two people
• Sessions are short
• You mostly need a quick shared note

It is simple, transparent, and easy to adopt.

Where MEMORY.md Starts to Break

As complexity grows, common issues appear:

• Retrieval becomes manual and slow
• Important decisions get buried in long entries
• Semantic intent is hard to query
• Recovery after interruption is ad hoc

At that point, the problem is not writing notes. It is running a memory system.

ClawVault Adds System-Level Reliability

ClawVault keeps the local transparency benefits of file-based memory, while adding:

• Structured memory categories
• Semantic retrieval (vsearch)
• Checkpoint and wake recovery
• Consistent CLI contracts for agents

Side-by-Side View

| Capability | MEMORY.md | ClawVault | | --- | --- | --- | | Setup speed | Very fast | Fast | | Human readability | Strong | Strong | | Semantic recall | Limited | Built-in | | Recovery workflow | Manual | Checkpoint + wake | | Scalability across sessions | Medium | High | | CLI automation | Limited | Core design |

Best of Both: Hybrid Pattern

You do not need to choose only one.

Recommended:

• Keep MEMORY.md as a high-level snapshot
• Use ClawVault for structured durable memory and retrieval

# Keep important decisions in ClawVault
clawvault store --category decisions --title "Cache Policy" \
  --content "Read-through cache with 5 minute TTL defaults"

# Keep project summary in MEMORY.md
echo "- Cache policy decided on 2026-02-12" >> MEMORY.md

Decision Rule

If memory is "nice to have," MEMORY.md may be enough.
If memory is "must be reliable," add ClawVault.

For implementation paths:

• /openclaw-memory
• /markdown-memory