Skip to main content
Glama
Leghis
by Leghis

Smart-Thinking

Help your AI check its work.

Smart-Thinking connects your usual AI assistant to tools for checking calculations, finding supporting passages and testing code. Ask in ordinary language; your assistant prepares the check and explains the result.

This package is the small MCP client. MCP is the protocol assistants use to connect to tools. The checking engine runs on the hosted service. You do not need to install a database, run the engine or supply a personal token for public access.

What can you do?

  • Check a number. Recalculate a discount, scale a recipe or compare complete quotes using exact arithmetic.

  • Check a source. Find the passage behind a statement and inspect its date, context and origin.

  • Check a code change. Run approved tests in an isolated environment and see which files were actually tested. A later change needs a new check.

Related MCP server: Tyra Advanced Memory MCP Server

Connect your assistant

You need Node.js 22.16 or newer and Internet access. For an assistant that accepts a mcpServers configuration, add:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "smart-thinking": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "smart-thinking-mcp@16.3.1"]
    }
  }
}

Save the configuration and reload the MCP connection in your assistant. VS Code uses a different format. Follow the application-specific connection guides for Codex, Claude, Cursor, VS Code or direct HTTP access.

To diagnose a connection from your terminal:

npx -y smart-thinking-mcp@16.3.1 --doctor --allow-network

The diagnostic checks connectivity and tool discovery. Provider availability is reported separately.

Try these three requests

  1. “Use Smart-Thinking to check €80 minus 20%, then add a 15% fee on the discounted price. Explain the steps.” Expected total: €73.60.

  2. “Use Smart-Thinking to scale 250 g of flour for four people to ten people.” Expected quantity: 625 g.

  3. “Use Smart-Thinking to order these steps: draft before review, review before publish.” Expected order: draft → review → publish.

See eighteen explained examples for sources and code, too.

Data and limits

Requests go to the hosted service. Search and semantic checks can use external providers; submitted code files run in a separate sandbox. The client does not scan your disk. Dossiers and results are stored server-side. Keep anonymous dossier identifiers private: they include access capabilities.

Public access has shared quotas. An exact calculation checks the supplied expression; passing tests cover the executed suite. Model reviews remain fallible. Code review has an internal qualification for bounded, explicit requirements. It can cover the declared semantic review when its evidence and qualification remain valid. This is not external accreditation or a correctness guarantee.

Read the data and trust guide, documentation and evaluations. The website is available in French and English.

MIT license. Source and issues.

Available Tools

1 tool
smartthinkingDInspect
ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
connectionsNoConnexions à d'autres pensées - Permet de lier cette pensée à d'autres pensées du graphe
containsCalculationsNoIndique si la pensée contient des calculs à vérifier
generateVisualizationNoGénérer une visualisation du graphe de pensée
helpNoAfficher le guide d'utilisation complet
requestSuggestionsNoDemander des suggestions d'amélioration du raisonnement
requestVerificationNoDemander explicitement une vérification des informations
sessionIdNoIdentifiant de session pour maintenir l'état entre les appels
suggestToolsNoSuggérer des outils MCP pertinents pour cette étape du raisonnement
thoughtYesLe contenu de la pensée à analyser - PARAMÈTRE OBLIGATOIRE - Cette pensée sera ajoutée au graphe de raisonnement
thoughtTypeNoType de pensée dans le graphe de raisonnement - Détermine la fonction de cette penséeregular
userIdNoIdentifiant de l'utilisateur pour la personnalisation
visualizationOptionsNoOptions avancées pour la visualisation
visualizationTypeNoType de visualisation à générergraph

TDQS

D1/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

Tool has no description.

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

Conciseness1/5

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

Tool has no description.

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?

Tool has no description.

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?

Tool has no description.

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

Purpose1/5

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

Tool has no description.

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?

Tool has no description.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 1 tool updatev1.0.0
    • First observedsmartthinking

TDQS

D1.7/5.0

Scored across 1 tool

Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or overlap between tools, as there are no other tools to compare it against. The single tool 'smartthinking' stands alone without ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

Since there is only one tool, it inherently follows a consistent naming pattern with itself. There are no other tools to create inconsistency, making the naming perfectly consistent by default.

Tool Count2/5

A single tool is generally too few for most server purposes, as it limits functionality and scope. Without a description, it's unclear if this minimal set is justified, but typically one tool feels thin and inadequate for meaningful operations.

Completeness1/5

With no description provided, it's impossible to infer the domain or assess coverage. A single tool with no context suggests severe incompleteness, as there are likely many gaps in functionality for any reasonable server purpose.

Maintenance

ActivityMaintained
ResponsivenessNo issues

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

  • F
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    An MCP server that leverages graph structures to perform sophisticated scientific reasoning through an 8-stage processing pipeline, enabling AI systems to handle complex scientific queries with dynamic confidence scoring.
    3
    -
  • -
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    Not graded
    maintenance
    A sophisticated MCP server providing advanced memory capabilities with RAG, hallucination detection, and enterprise-grade AI infrastructure for intelligent agent ecosystems.
    -
  • A
    license
    A
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    Advanced cognitive thinking MCP server with DAG-based thought graph, multiple reasoning strategies, metacognition, and self-evaluation. A significant evolution beyond sequential-thinking MCP, providing structured deep reasoning with graph-based thought management.
    2
    6
    102 npm
    13
    MIT