mcp-sequentialthinking-tools
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| MAX_HISTORY_SIZE | No | Maximum number of thoughts stored per session | 1000 |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Server capabilities have not been inspected yet.
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| sequentialthinking_toolsA | A detailed tool for dynamic and reflective problem-solving through thoughts. This tool helps analyze problems through a flexible thinking process that can adapt and evolve. Each thought can build on, question, or revise previous insights as understanding deepens. IMPORTANT: This server facilitates sequential thinking with MCP tool coordination. The LLM analyzes available tools and their descriptions to make intelligent recommendations, which are then tracked and organized by this server. When to use this tool:
Key features:
Parameters explained:
You should:
|
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
With only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap with other tools. The tool 'sequentialthinking_tools' has a singular, clearly defined purpose for dynamic problem-solving, so an agent cannot misselect between non-existent alternatives.
Since there is only one tool, naming consistency is inherently perfect. The tool name uses a consistent snake_case format, and there are no other tools to compare it against, so no inconsistencies can arise.
A single tool is too few for the server's stated purpose of facilitating sequential thinking with MCP tool coordination. The tool description implies a need for interaction with multiple tools, but the server only provides one meta-tool, which feels thin and limits functionality for the intended scope.
The server is severely incomplete for its domain. It lacks direct tools for the actual operations it coordinates (e.g., search, data retrieval, execution), relying solely on a meta-tool for recommendations. This creates a significant gap, as agents cannot perform the underlying tasks without external tools, leading to potential dead ends in workflows.