Which integrations are available for this server?

Serves as the runtime environment for the DeepLucid3D UCPF Server, allowing it to function as an MCP server that can be integrated with Claude.

How do I use DeepLucid3D UCPF Server?

1. Click on "Install Server". 2. Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state. 3. In the chat, type @ followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@DeepLucid3D UCPF Server analyze the problem of reducing plastic waste in urban areas" That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed. Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.

de en es ja ko ru zh

DeepLucid3D UCPF Server

by MushroomFleet

Overview Schema Related Servers Score Discussions

TypeScript

Remote

DeepLucid3D UCPF Server

A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server implementing the Unified Cognitive Processing Framework (UCPF) for advanced cognitive analysis, creative problem-solving, and structured thinking.

What is it?

The DeepLucid3D UCPF Server is an implementation of the Unified Cognitive Processing Framework as an MCP server. It combines recursive self-awareness with dimensional knowledge categorization to provide a powerful approach to problem-solving and creative thinking.

This server extends AI capabilities by providing structured cognitive tools that help:

Assess cognitive states
Map knowledge dimensions
Apply recursive self-questioning
Generate creative perspectives
Decompose and reintegrate complex problems

Related MCP server: Advanced Reasoning MCP Server

What it does

The UCPF Server enables advanced cognitive processing through several key features:

Core Capabilities

Cognitive State Assessment: Identifies current cognitive states (Dark Inertia, Passion, or Approaching Lucidity) to improve self-awareness during problem-solving.
Knowledge Dimension Mapping: Maps knowledge across three dimensions:
- Awareness (Known vs. Unknown)
- Content (Knowns vs. Unknowns)
- Accessibility (Knowable vs. Unknowable)
Recursive Self-Questioning: Challenges initial assumptions and identifies potential cognitive biases.
Creative Perspective Generation: Produces novel viewpoints and metaphorical thinking to inspire new solutions.
Problem Decomposition: Breaks complex problems into manageable components and reintegrates them with awareness of the whole system.
Optional State Management: Maintains context between sessions for ongoing analysis.

Setup and Installation

Prerequisites

Node.js (v14 or higher)
npm (v6 or higher)
An environment compatible with the Model Context Protocol

Installation Steps

Clone the repository

git clone https://github.com/yourusername/DeepLucid3D-UCPF-Server.git
cd DeepLucid3D-UCPF-Server

Install dependencies
```
npm install
```
Build the project
```
npm run build
```
Configure MCP settings
Add the server to your MCP settings file. For Claude/Cline, this is typically located at:
- For Claude Desktop: ~/Library/Application Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json (macOS)
- For VSCode Cline: ~/.config/Code/User/globalStorage/saoudrizwan.claude-dev/settings/cline_mcp_settings.json (Linux)
Add the following configuration:
```
{
  "mcpServers": {
   "ucpf": {
   "command": "node",
   "args": ["path/to/DeepLucid3D-MCP/build/index.js"],
   "env": {},
   "disabled": false,
   "autoApprove": []
    }
  }
}
```
Restart your MCP-compatible application (Claude, VSCode with Cline, etc.)

How to Use

The server exposes three main tools and several resources that can be accessed through MCP:

Tools

analyze_problem: Process a problem statement through the full UCPF framework

<use_mcp_tool>
<server_name>ucpf</server_name>
<tool_name>analyze_problem</tool_name>
<arguments>
{
  "problem": "Your problem statement here",
  "session_id": "optional-session-id",
  "enable_state": false,
  "detailed": false
}
</arguments>
</use_mcp_tool>

creative_exploration: Generate novel perspectives and connections for a topic

<use_mcp_tool>
<server_name>ucpf</server_name>
<tool_name>creative_exploration</tool_name>
<arguments>
{
  "topic": "Your topic here",
  "constraints": ["Optional constraint 1", "Optional constraint 2"],
  "perspective_count": 3,
  "include_metaphors": true
}
</arguments>
</use_mcp_tool>

manage_state: Control state management for UCPF processing

<use_mcp_tool>
<server_name>ucpf</server_name>
<tool_name>manage_state</tool_name>
<arguments>
{
  "action": "enable", // or "disable", "reset", "status"
  "session_id": "optional-specific-session-id"
}
</arguments>
</use_mcp_tool>

Resources

Access framework documentation:

<access_mcp_resource>
<server_name>ucpf</server_name>
<uri>ucpf://framework/overview</uri>
</access_mcp_resource>

Available resources:

ucpf://framework/overview: Overview of the UCPF framework
ucpf://framework/cognitive-states: Guide to cognitive states
ucpf://framework/knowledge-dimensions: Reference for knowledge dimensions
ucpf://session/{sessionId}/analysis: Analysis results for a specific session

Example Use Case: Using UCPF to Solve a Riddle

Let's solve the classic riddle: "What walks on four legs in the morning, two legs in the afternoon, and three legs in the evening?"

Step 1: Enable state management for session persistence

<use_mcp_tool>
<server_name>ucpf</server_name>
<tool_name>manage_state</tool_name>
<arguments>
{
  "action": "enable"
}
</arguments>
</use_mcp_tool>

Step 2: Analyze the riddle using the UCPF framework

<use_mcp_tool>
<server_name>ucpf</server_name>
<tool_name>analyze_problem</tool_name>
<arguments>
{
  "problem": "What walks on four legs in the morning, two legs in the afternoon, and three legs in the evening?",
  "session_id": "sphinx-riddle",
  "enable_state": true
}
</arguments>
</use_mcp_tool>

The analysis will provide:

Cognitive state assessment (likely identifying potential metaphorical thinking)
Knowledge mapping of what we know and don't know
Recursive questions to challenge initial assumptions (e.g., "Are we assuming literal legs?")
Structured perspectives on different interpretations

Step 3: Explore creative perspectives to find the solution

<use_mcp_tool>
<server_name>ucpf</server_name>
<tool_name>creative_exploration</tool_name>
<arguments>
{
  "topic": "Walking with different numbers of legs at different times of day",
  "constraints": ["morning", "afternoon", "evening", "four", "two", "three"],
  "include_metaphors": true,
  "session_id": "sphinx-riddle"
}
</arguments>
</use_mcp_tool>

This exploration might reveal:

The metaphorical interpretation of "legs" as support structures
The metaphorical interpretation of times of day as stages of life
Leading to the classic answer: a human, who crawls on four limbs as a baby, walks on two legs as an adult, and uses a cane (third "leg") in old age

Step 4: Review the session analysis

<access_mcp_resource>
<server_name>ucpf</server_name>
<uri>ucpf://session/sphinx-riddle/analysis</uri>
</access_mcp_resource>

This provides the complete analysis journey, showing how the framework led to the solution through structured cognitive processing.

Acknowledgments

This project stands on the shoulders of giants:

The Model Context Protocol (MCP) team for creating the foundational protocol that enables AI systems to access external tools and resources
The Anthropic Claude team for their work on advanced AI systems capable of utilizing MCP
Contributors to the Unified Cognitive Processing Framework concepts that power the cognitive analysis methodology
The open-source community whose libraries and tools make projects like this possible

License

MIT License

Project Structure

DeepLucid3D-UCPF-Server/
├── src/
│   ├── engine/
│   │   ├── ucpf-core.ts       # Core UCPF processing logic
│   │   ├── creative-patterns.ts  # Creative thinking utilities
│   │   └── state-manager.ts   # Session state management
│   ├── tools/
│   │   ├── analyze-problem.ts # Problem analysis tool
│   │   └── creative-exploration.ts  # Creative exploration tool
│   └── index.ts               # Main server implementation
├── build/                     # Compiled JavaScript files
├── package.json               # Project dependencies and scripts
└── README.md                  # This documentation

Available Tools

3 tools

analyze_problemC

Process a problem statement through the full UCPF framework

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`detailed`	No	Whether to include detailed analysis
`enable_state`	No	Whether to enable state management for this analysis
`problem`	Yes	The problem statement to analyze
`session_id`	No	Optional session ID for maintaining state between calls

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'process' and 'full UCPF framework', implying analysis or transformation, but doesn't describe what the tool actually does behaviorally—such as whether it performs computations, returns structured data, has side effects, or requires specific permissions. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's operation and impact.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary words. It directly states the action and resource, making it easy to parse and understand quickly, with no wasted information.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity implied by 'full UCPF framework' and the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how it handles state or detailed analysis, or its behavioral traits, leaving the agent with insufficient context to use the tool effectively beyond basic parameter input.

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 schema fully documents all four parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining how parameters interact with the UCPF framework or typical use cases. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the description doesn't compensate but also doesn't detract.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description states the tool 'processes a problem statement through the full UCPF framework', which provides a clear verb ('process') and resource ('problem statement') with a specific methodology ('UCPF framework'). However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'creative_exploration' or 'manage_state', leaving the specific scope of 'full UCPF framework' somewhat vague compared to alternatives.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling tools 'creative_exploration' or 'manage_state'. It lacks explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage based on the tool name and description alone without clear alternatives or constraints.

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

creative_explorationC

Generate novel perspectives and connections for a topic

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`constraints`	No	Optional constraints or parameters to consider
`include_metaphors`	No	Whether to include metaphorical thinking
`perspective_count`	No	Number of perspectives to generate
`session_id`	No	Optional session ID for maintaining state between calls
`topic`	Yes	The topic or problem to explore creatively

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions generating 'novel perspectives and connections,' which implies a creative, non-destructive process, but fails to detail aspects like rate limits, authentication needs, output format, or whether it maintains state (e.g., via session_id). For a tool with no annotations, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 a single, efficient sentence: 'Generate novel perspectives and connections for a topic.' It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, with no wasted words. This makes it easy to parse and understand quickly.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits, output format, and how parameters interact, which are crucial for an AI agent to use it effectively. Without annotations or an output schema, the description should provide more context to compensate, but it does not.

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%, meaning all parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining how 'constraints' affect generation or what 'perspective_count' entails. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the description doesn't compensate but also doesn't detract.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the tool's function: 'Generate novel perspectives and connections for a topic.' It specifies the verb ('generate') and resource ('perspectives and connections'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'analyze_problem' or 'manage_state', which might also involve topic exploration or state management.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when to choose 'creative_exploration' over 'analyze_problem' or 'manage_state', nor any context about prerequisites or exclusions. This leaves the agent without clear usage instructions.

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

manage_stateC

Control the state management for UCPF processing

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`action`	Yes	The state management action to perform
`session_id`	No	Optional session ID to target a specific session

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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 mentions 'control' and actions like 'enable', 'disable', 'reset', and 'status', implying mutation capabilities, but doesn't specify permissions needed, side effects (e.g., data loss on reset), rate limits, or response format. This leaves critical behavioral traits undocumented for a tool that appears to modify system state.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a tool with two parameters, though it could be more front-loaded with key details given the lack of annotations and output schema.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity implied by state management actions (including mutations like 'disable' and 'reset'), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral risks, response expectations, or error conditions, leaving significant gaps for the agent to operate safely and effectively.

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%, with clear documentation for both parameters (action with enum values and optional session_id). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining what 'reset' entails or when to use session_id. This meets the baseline of 3 since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description states the tool 'Control[s] the state management for UCPF processing', which provides a general purpose (state management) and domain (UCPF processing) but lacks specificity about what 'state management' entails or what resources are affected. It doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'analyze_problem' or 'creative_exploration', leaving the agent to infer differences based on tool names alone.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, typical scenarios, or exclusions, and there's no comparison to sibling tools. The agent must rely solely on the tool name and input schema to infer usage context.

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

Install Server

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: analyze_problem handles problem statement processing, creative_exploration generates novel perspectives, and manage_state controls state management. There is no overlap in functionality, making tool selection straightforward for an agent.

Naming Consistency4/5

The tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (analyze_problem, creative_exploration, manage_state), which is predictable and readable. The minor deviation is that 'manage_state' uses a verb_noun structure while the others are adjective_noun or verb_noun, but overall consistency is maintained.

Tool Count3/5

With only 3 tools, the set feels thin for a server named 'DeepLucid3D UCPF Server,' which suggests a complex framework. While each tool seems essential, the low count may limit coverage of the UCPF domain, potentially requiring agents to work around missing operations.

Completeness2/5

Inferred domain is UCPF (Unified Creative Problem Framework) processing, but the tool set has significant gaps. It lacks core operations like retrieving results, updating analyses, or deleting states, which could lead to agent failures in handling full problem-solving lifecycles. The surface is incomplete for the stated purpose.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive

ResponsivenessSyncing

Resources

GitHub Repository

Need Help?

Related Servers

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.

Related MCP Connectors

strata
ai.klavis
MCP server for progressive tool usage at any scale (see https://klavis.ai)
Agent Orchestration Autonomous Agents Developer Tools
25,748
Parallel Task MCP AOAuth
ai.parallel
An MCP server for deep research or task groups
Autonomous Agents Agent Orchestration Research & Data
415
mcp-kettlelogic A
com.kettlelogic
MCP server exposing Kettle Logic insight articles & industry guidance as tools + resources.
Documentation Access Knowledge & Memory
52
PlanExe A
io.github.PlanExeOrg
MCP server for generating rough-draft project plans from natural-language prompts.
Autonomous Agents Developer Tools Project Management
113398

Related MCP Servers

Sequential Thinking Multi
Agent Orchestration Autonomous Agents RAG Systems
FradSer
F
license
A
quality
A
maintenance
An advanced MCP server that implements sophisticated sequential thinking using a coordinated team of specialized AI agents (Planner, Researcher, Analyzer, Critic, Synthesizer) to deeply analyze problems and provide high-quality, structured reasoning.
Updated a month ago (2026-08-05 07:07 UTC)
1
305
Advanced Reasoning MCP Server
Knowledge & Memory Autonomous Agents Code Execution
angrysky56
A
license
A
quality
F
maintenance
An MCP server that enhances sequential thinking with meta-cognitive capabilities including confidence tracking, hypothesis testing, and organized memory storage through graph-based libraries and structured JSON documents.
Updated 3 months ago (2026-06-01 04:10 UTC)
10
13
MIT
verifiable-thinking-mcp
Autonomous Agents Developer Tools
CoderDayton
A
license
B
quality
Not graded
maintenance
MCP server for structured reasoning with cognitive trap detection, verification, and context compression
Updated 7 months ago (2026-02-10 19:36 UTC)
5
41
1
deep-thinker
Autonomous Agents AI & Machine Learning Developer Tools
nachosystems
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.
Updated 3 months ago (2026-05-23 12:17 UTC)
6
144
11
MIT

Appeared in Searches

Latest Blog Posts

Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 25, 2026.
mcp
Agent Identity
OAuth 2.1
Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an Intern
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 2, 2026.
Agent Identity
MCP Security
OAuth Delegation
Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)
By Om-Shree-0709 on June 30, 2026.
Agentic Ai
Prompt Injection
WebAssembly

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/MushroomFleet/DeepLucid3D-MCP'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server

DeepLucid3D UCPF Server

What is it?

What it does

Core Capabilities

Setup and Installation

Prerequisites

Installation Steps

How to Use

Tools

Resources

Example Use Case: Using UCPF to Solve a Riddle

Step 1: Enable state management for session persistence

Step 2: Analyze the riddle using the UCPF framework

Step 3: Explore creative perspectives to find the solution

Step 4: Review the session analysis

Acknowledgments

License

Project Structure

See Also

Available Tools

Maintenance

Resources

Looking for Admin?

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

Appeared in Searches

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API