Skip to main content
Glama
1999AZZAR

chaining-mcp-server

by 1999AZZAR
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

sequentialthinking

Record a thought step, let Needle choose the next action, and feed the result forward to advance structured reasoning toward task completion.

Instructions

Think one step with the Mitosis agent: your thought is recorded as an observation in AgentState, Needle decides the next action (call_tool/revise/complete/escalate), and the result feeds the next step. Pass sessionId to continue a session.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
taskNoOngoing task this step belongs to (agent mode; defaults to the thought)
executeNoExecute a call_tool decision immediately (agent mode)
thoughtYesYour current thinking step
branchIdNoBranch identifier
sessionIdNoContinue an existing agent session (agent mode)
isRevisionNoWhether this revises previous thinking
thoughtNumberYesCurrent thought number
totalThoughtsYesEstimated total thoughts needed
revisesThoughtNoWhich thought is being reconsidered
branchFromThoughtNoBranching point thought number
needsMoreThoughtsNoIf more thoughts are needed
nextThoughtNeededYesWhether another thought step is needed

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv1.1.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / execute
      Added value: +{
+  "default": true,
+  "description": "Execute a call_tool decision immediately (agent mode)",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / sessionId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Continue an existing agent session (agent mode)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / task
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Ongoing task this step belongs to (agent mode; defaults to the thought)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does well by explaining that thoughts become observations in AgentState, that Needle determines the next action (call_tool/revise/complete/escalate), and that results feed subsequent steps. This goes beyond the schema by clarifying the execution flow and side effects, though it does not detail every state mutation or edge case.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is only two sentences, with the primary action and result flow front-loaded. The first sentence explains the tool's role and the second provides the session continuation caveat. Every clause earns its place; there is no filler or repetition of schema content.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (12 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the essential behavioral protocol: single-step thinking, AgentState recording, and Needle's decision loop. It does not explain all branching/revision parameters, but those are documented in the input schema. The overall invocation context is sufficiently complete for an agent to use it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal parameter-level insight beyond the schema, only mentioning sessionId for continuation. Since each parameter already has a descriptive schema entry, the description does not need to compensate, but it also does not add meaningful extra semantics.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states what the tool does: 'Think one step with the Mitosis agent: your thought is recorded as an observation in AgentState, Needle decides the next action...' This is a specific verb-resource pairing with a distinct mechanism. It is easily distinguishable from sibling tools like analyze_with_sequential_thinking, which focus on analysis of chains rather than performing a single step.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear context on when to invoke this tool: each call represents exactly one thinking step in a larger agent-driven process, and 'Pass sessionId to continue a session' indicates usage for ongoing sessions. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the core usage context is unambiguous.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools