Kortx MCP Server

consult

Get expert answers to domain-specific questions in software architecture, security, performance, and more. Specify your domain and constraints for tailored consultation.

Instructions

Ask domain-specific questions with expert consultation. Supports multiple domains: software-architecture, security, performance, database, devops, frontend, backend, ai-ml, or general.

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": {
      "question": "<question>"
    },
    "name": "consult"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`question`	Yes	The question to ask the expert
`domain`	No	Domain expertise to consult (default: general)
`context`	No	Additional context about the question
`constraints`	No	Constraints or limitations to consider
`preferredModel`	No	Preferred GPT-5 model to use

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.3.0Jun 11, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations are empty, so description carries full burden. It mentions expert consultation and preferred model, but does not disclose whether it calls an external API, latency, cost implications, or caching. Incomplete behavioral disclosure.

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?

One sentence plus domain list. Efficient and readable. Could be slightly more structured but no wasted words.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Adequate for a tool with rich schema descriptions, but lacking guidance on when to use versus alternative tools and no output schema to explain return format. Could be improved with usage examples.

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 all parameters are described. Description adds minimal new meaning beyond listing domains which are already in the enum. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states the tool asks domain-specific questions with expert consultation. Lists supported domains. However, does not explicitly differentiate from sibling 'batch-consult', but the purpose is specific enough.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Implied usage for domain-specific questions but no when-not-to-use guidance or comparison with siblings like 'solve-problem' or 'think-about-plan'. The list of domains provides context but no exclusions.

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

Deploy Server