Skip to main content
Glama

sequential_thinking

Analyze problems through a structured yet adaptable thinking process that supports revisions, branching, and step-by-step reasoning to reach solutions.

Instructions

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.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
thoughtYesThe core thinking process or analysis at this stage, forming a coherent narrative.
branchIdNoA unique identifier for a specific branch of thought, allowing for parallel exploration.
sessionIdNoOptional session identifier for maintaining state across multiple thoughts.
isRevisionNoIndicates if this thought is a revision of a previous one.
currentStepNoThe detailed description of the immediate next step to be executed.
previousStepsNoA record of the steps that have already been completed.
thoughtNumberYesThe sequential number of the current thought in the series.
totalThoughtsYesThe total number of thoughts planned for this problem-solving session.
remainingStepsNoA high-level list of the steps that are yet to be taken.
revisesThoughtNoThe number of the thought that this one revises, if applicable.
toolUsageHistoryNoA log of the tools that have been used so far, along with their effectiveness.
branchFromThoughtNoThe thought number from which a new branch of thinking emerges.
needsMoreThoughtsNoIndicates if the current plan needs more thoughts to be added.
nextThoughtNeededYesA flag indicating whether another thought is required to continue the process.
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations present; description fails to disclose behaviors like state management, branching, or revision handling beyond what is in the schema. It adds no extra behavioral context.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Two sentences are concise but front-loaded with generic terms. The description lacks structure; it doesn't orient the agent efficiently despite brevity.

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?

The tool has 14 parameters and nested objects, yet the description is vague. It fails to explain the sequential call pattern (thoughtNumber, totalThoughts, nextThoughtNeeded) or usage context, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond schemas, but the schema itself is detailed. No new parameter insights are provided.

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 it's for 'dynamic and reflective problem-solving through thoughts' but does not specifically mention 'sequential' or 'step-by-step' nature. Among many reasoning siblings, it lacks differentiation, making it moderately clear.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'collaborative_reasoning' or 'critical_thinking'. The description provides no context for selection or exclusion.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

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/emmahyde/thinking-patterns'

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