Brawler MCP Server (Python)

Route

route

Classify and dispatch agent queries based on defined task types like completion or context. This function ensures unsupported operations are handled as 'none' within the Brawler MCP server.

Instructions

Router-tagged tool; Brawler treats unsupported tasks as none.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "route"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 26, 2026

TDQS

D1.3/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior, but it says nothing about side effects, permissions, error behavior, or what routing means operationally. The only behavioral statement is an unexplained reference to 'Brawler' and 'unsupported tasks.'

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is short, but its brevity comes from under-specification rather than efficiency. The first clause is redundant with the tool name, and the second clause is opaque and not front-loaded with actionable information.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Although an output schema exists, the description still needs to explain the tool's purpose, behavior, and the required query parameter. It leaves an agent unable to determine what the tool does or when to call it.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The schema has one required parameter, 'query', at 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It never mentions 'query', its expected format, or its meaning.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description says only that this is a 'Router-tagged tool,' which largely restates the name/title rather than naming a specific action or resource. It does not explain what 'route' actually does or how it differs from siblings such as policies, open_ticket, or legacy_search.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, when not to use it, or which sibling to choose instead. The phrase 'Brawler treats unsupported tasks as none' is cryptic and could mislead rather than clarify usage.

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

Deploy Server