UltraThink
Click on "Install Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@UltraThinkhelp me think through the edge cases for our new payment system"
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.
UltraThink MCP Server
A Python MCP server for sequential thinking and problem-solving
Enhanced Python port of the Sequential Thinking MCP Server by Anthropic. Maintains full compatibility while adding confidence scoring, auto-assigned thought numbers, and multi-session support.
Using Claude Code? Install the UltraThink Plugin for seamless integration - no MCP server setup required!
# Via terminal
claude plugin marketplace add husniadil/ekstend
claude plugin install ultrathink@ekstend
# Or interactively in Claude Code
/plugin marketplace add husniadil/ekstend
/plugin install ultrathink@ekstendMeta: This MCP server was built iteratively using UltraThink itself - a practical example of the tool's capability to break down complex problems, manage architectural decisions, and maintain context across development sessions.
Features
UltraThink: Break down complex problems into manageable steps
Dynamic Adjustments: Revise and refine thoughts as understanding deepens
Branching: Explore alternative paths of reasoning
Confidence Scoring: Explicit uncertainty tracking (0.0-1.0 scale)
Auto-adjustment: Automatically adjusts total thoughts if needed
Multi-Session Support: Manage multiple concurrent thinking sessions with session IDs
Formatted Logging: Colored terminal output with rich formatting (can be disabled)
100% Test Coverage: Comprehensive test suite with full code coverage
Type Safety: Full mypy strict mode type checking for production code
Simple Layered Architecture: Clean separation with models, services, and interface layers
Related MCP server: Sequential Thinking MCP Server
Installation
Quick Install (Recommended)
Run directly with uvx from GitHub (no installation needed):
uvx --from git+https://github.com/husniadil/ultrathink ultrathinkDevelopment Setup
For local development:
# Clone the repository
git clone https://github.com/husniadil/ultrathink.git
cd ultrathink
# Install all dependencies (including dev dependencies)
uv syncUsage
Task Commands (npm-like)
# List all available tasks
uv run task --list
# Run the server
uv run task run
# Run tests with coverage
uv run task test
# Run tests without coverage (quick)
uv run task test-quick
# Run the test client
uv run task client
# Format code (ruff + prettier)
uv run task format
# Lint code
uv run task lint
# Type check with mypy
uv run task typecheck
# Clean cache files
uv run task cleanDirect Commands (Alternative)
For direct execution without task runner:
# Run the server directly
uv run ultrathink
# Run the test client directly
uv run python examples/client.pyNote: For testing, linting, and formatting, prefer using uv run task commands shown above.
Tool: ultrathink
The server provides a single tool for dynamic and reflective problem-solving through structured thinking.
Parameters
Required:
thought(str): Your current thinking steptotal_thoughts(int): Estimated total thoughts needed (>=1)
Optional:
thought_number(int): Current thought number - auto-assigned sequentially if omitted (1, 2, 3...), or provide explicit number for branching/semantic controlnext_thought_needed(bool): Whether another thought step is needed. Auto-assigned asthought_number < total_thoughtsif omitted. Set explicitly to override default behaviorsession_id(str): Session identifier for managing multiple thinking sessions (None = create new, provide ID to continue session)is_revision(bool): Whether this revises previous thinkingrevises_thought(int): Which thought number is being reconsideredbranch_from_thought(int): Branching point thought numberbranch_id(str): Branch identifierneeds_more_thoughts(bool): If more thoughts are neededconfidence(float): Confidence level (0.0-1.0, e.g., 0.7 for 70% confident)uncertainty_notes(str): Optional explanation for doubts or concerns about this thoughtoutcome(str): What was achieved or expected as result of this thoughtassumptions(list[Assumption]): Assumptions made in this thought (id, text, confidence, critical, verifiable)depends_on_assumptions(list[str]): Assumption IDs this thought depends on (e.g., ["A1", "A2"])invalidates_assumptions(list[str]): Assumption IDs proven false (e.g., ["A3"])
Response
Returns a JSON object with:
session_id: Session identifier for continuationthought_number: Current thought numbertotal_thoughts: Total thoughts (auto-adjusted if needed)next_thought_needed: Whether more thinking is neededbranches: List of branch IDsthought_history_length: Number of thoughts processed in this sessionconfidence: Confidence level of this thought (0.0-1.0, optional)uncertainty_notes: Explanation for doubts or concerns (optional)outcome: What was achieved or expected (optional)all_assumptions: All assumptions tracked in this session (keyed by ID)risky_assumptions: IDs of risky assumptions (critical + low confidence + unverified)falsified_assumptions: IDs of assumptions proven false
Example
Basic Usage
from fastmcp import Client
from ultrathink import mcp
async with Client(mcp) as client:
# Simple sequential thinking with auto-assigned fields
result = await client.call_tool("ultrathink", {
"thought": "Let me analyze this problem step by step",
"total_thoughts": 3
# thought_number auto-assigned: 1
# next_thought_needed auto-assigned: True (1 < 3)
})With Enhanced Features
async with Client(mcp) as client:
# With confidence scoring and explicit session
result = await client.call_tool("ultrathink", {
"thought": "Initial hypothesis - this approach might work",
"total_thoughts": 5,
"confidence": 0.6, # 60% confident
# next_thought_needed auto-assigned: True
"session_id": "problem-solving-session-1"
})
# Continue the same session with higher confidence
result2 = await client.call_tool("ultrathink", {
"thought": "After analysis, I'm more certain about this solution",
"total_thoughts": 5,
"confidence": 0.9, # 90% confident
# next_thought_needed auto-assigned: True
"session_id": "problem-solving-session-1" # Same session
})
# Branch from a previous thought
result3 = await client.call_tool("ultrathink", {
"thought": "Let me explore an alternative approach",
"total_thoughts": 6,
"confidence": 0.7,
"branch_from_thought": 1,
"branch_id": "alternative-path",
# next_thought_needed auto-assigned: True
"session_id": "problem-solving-session-1"
})With Uncertainty Notes and Outcome
async with Client(mcp) as client:
# Track uncertainty and outcomes
result = await client.call_tool("ultrathink", {
"thought": "Testing the authentication fix",
"total_thoughts": 5,
"confidence": 0.8,
"uncertainty_notes": "Haven't tested under high load yet",
"outcome": "Login flow works for standard users"
})
# Response includes the new fields
print(result["confidence"]) # 0.8
print(result["uncertainty_notes"]) # "Haven't tested under high load yet"
print(result["outcome"]) # "Login flow works for standard users"With Assumption Tracking
async with Client(mcp) as client:
# Thought 1: State assumptions explicitly
result = await client.call_tool("ultrathink", {
"thought": "Redis should meet our performance requirements",
"total_thoughts": 4,
"assumptions": [
{
"id": "A1",
"text": "Network latency to Redis < 5ms",
"confidence": 0.8,
"critical": True,
"verifiable": True,
"evidence": "Based on preliminary network tests in staging environment"
}
]
})
# Thought 2: Build on previous assumptions
result2 = await client.call_tool("ultrathink", {
"thought": "Based on low latency, Redis can handle 10K req/sec",
"total_thoughts": 4,
"depends_on_assumptions": ["A1"],
"session_id": result["session_id"]
})
# Thought 3: Invalidate if proven false
result3 = await client.call_tool("ultrathink", {
"thought": "After testing, latency is 15ms, not 5ms!",
"total_thoughts": 4,
"invalidates_assumptions": ["A1"],
"session_id": result["session_id"]
})
# Track all assumptions and detect risky ones
print(result3["all_assumptions"]) # {"A1": {...}}
print(result3["falsified_assumptions"]) # ["A1"]Configuration
Environment Variables
DISABLE_THOUGHT_LOGGING: Set to"true"to disable colored thought logging to stderr
Usage with Claude Desktop
Add to your claude_desktop_config.json:
Using uvx from GitHub (Recommended)
{
"mcpServers": {
"UltraThink": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"--from",
"git+https://github.com/husniadil/ultrathink",
"ultrathink"
]
}
}
}Local Development
For local development from source:
{
"mcpServers": {
"UltraThink": {
"command": "uv",
"args": ["--directory", "/path/to/ultrathink", "run", "ultrathink"]
}
}
}Local Configuration File
For local development and testing, you can create a .mcp.json file (see .mcp.json.example):
# Copy the example file
cp .mcp.json.example .mcp.json
# Edit to match your local path
# Change /path/to/ultrathink to your actual directoryExample configuration (.mcp.json.example):
{
"mcpServers": {
"UltraThink": {
"command": "uv",
"args": ["--directory", "/path/to/ultrathink", "run", "ultrathink"],
"env": {
"DISABLE_THOUGHT_LOGGING": "false"
}
}
}
}This configuration:
Enables thought logging by default (
DISABLE_THOUGHT_LOGGING: "false")Can be used with MCP clients that support
.mcp.jsonconfigurationUseful for testing the server locally with colored output enabled
Note:
.mcp.jsonis gitignored - customize it for your local setup
Session Management
Session Lifecycle
Important: Sessions are stored in-memory only and will be lost when the server restarts or terminates. Each session is identified by a unique session ID and maintains:
Thought history for that session
Branch tracking
Sequential thought numbering
Implications:
Sessions do not persist across server restarts
All thinking context is lost when the server stops
For production use cases requiring persistent sessions, you would need to implement custom session persistence (e.g., to disk, database, or external state management)
Best Practices:
Use custom session IDs (instead of auto-generated UUIDs) for resilient recovery if you need to recreate session context
Keep session-critical information in your application layer if persistence is required
Consider sessions as ephemeral working memory for active problem-solving tasks
Architecture
Built with Simple Layered Architecture principles for clean separation of concerns and maintainable code.
Files
src/ultrathink/ (3-layer structure)
Models Layer (models/)
thought.py: Thought, ThoughtRequest, ThoughtResponse models
session.py: ThinkingSession model
Services Layer (services/)
thinking_service.py: UltraThinkService business logic
Interface Layer (interface/)
mcp_server.py: MCP server entry point with FastMCP tool registration
Package Entry Points
__init__.py: Package exports
__main__.py: CLI entry point (enables
uv run ultrathink)
tests/ (100% coverage, mirroring source structure)
Models Tests (models/)
test_thought.py: Thought model tests (properties, formatting)
test_session.py: Session logging and formatting tests
Services Tests (services/)
test_thinking_service.py: Service tests (validation, functionality, branching, multi-session)
Interface Tests (interface/)
test_mcp_server.py: MCP tool function tests
Root Test Files
test_cli.py: CLI entry point tests
examples/
client.py: Test client demonstrating tool usage
Architecture Layers
1. Models Layer
Pydantic models for data representation and validation:
Thought: Core model representing a single thought with validation and behaviors ThoughtRequest: Input model from MCP clients with validation ThoughtResponse: Output model to MCP clients with structured data ThinkingSession: Session model managing thought history and branches
# Type-safe model usage
request = ThoughtRequest(
thought="My thinking step",
thought_number=1,
total_thoughts=3,
next_thought_needed=True
)
response = ThoughtResponse(
thought_number=1,
total_thoughts=3,
next_thought_needed=True,
branches=[],
thought_history_length=1
)2. Services Layer
Business logic and orchestration:
UltraThinkService: Orchestrates the thinking process
Responsibilities:
Model Translation:
ThoughtRequest → Thoughtmodel (input)Business Logic: Delegate to
ThinkingSessionResponse Building: Session state →
ThoughtResponsemodel (output)Validation: Leverages Pydantic for automatic validation
Session Management: Create and manage multiple thinking sessions
Key Method:
process_thought(request: ThoughtRequest) → ThoughtResponse: Main orchestration
service = UltraThinkService()
# Full flow:
# 1. Receives ThoughtRequest from interface layer
# 2. Translates to Thought model
# 3. Calls session.add_thought() (business logic)
# 4. Builds ThoughtResponse from session state
# 5. Returns response
request = ThoughtRequest(thought="...", thought_number=1, ...)
response = service.process_thought(request)3. Interface Layer
External interface using FastMCP:
mcp_server.py: MCP server tool registration
Responsibilities:
Define MCP tools using
@mcp.tooldecoratorMap tool parameters to model types
Call services layer for processing
Return responses to MCP clients
@mcp.tool
def ultrathink(thought: str, total_thoughts: int, ...) -> ThoughtResponse:
request = ThoughtRequest(thought=thought, total_thoughts=total_thoughts, ...)
return thinking_service.process_thought(request)Type Safety Benefits:
Pydantic validation on all inputs/outputs
No arbitrary dicts - strict typing throughout
Automatic validation errors
Clear separation between interface and business logic
Architecture Benefits
Clear Separation of Concerns:
Models layer = Data models with validation and behaviors
Services layer = Business logic and orchestration
Interface layer = External API (MCP tools)
Simpler Structure: Flatter folder hierarchy (2 levels instead of 3)
Easier Imports: Shorter relative import paths (
..modelsvs...domain.entities)Consolidated Models: Related models grouped together (Thought, ThoughtRequest, ThoughtResponse in one file)
Testable: Easy to test each layer in isolation
Maintainable:
Change interface? → Update interface layer only
Change business rules? → Update services layer only
Change validation? → Update models layer only
Extensible: Easy to add new models, services, or tools
Interface Independence: Services can be reused with different interfaces (REST API, gRPC, CLI, etc.)
Type Safety: Pydantic models throughout ensure validation at all boundaries
Development
Running Tests
# Run all tests with coverage (recommended)
uv run task test
# Run tests without coverage (quick)
uv run task test-quick
# Coverage is 100%Type Checking
# Run mypy type checker on all code
uv run task typecheck
# Mypy runs in strict mode on entire codebaseThe project uses mypy in strict mode across the entire codebase (src/, tests/, examples/) to ensure complete type safety.
Test Organization
Tests are organized by layers, mirroring the source structure (100% coverage):
Models Layer Tests (tests/models/)
test_thought.py: Model properties, auto-adjustment, formatting, validation, and confidence scoring
test_session.py: Session logging and formatted output
Services Layer Tests (tests/services/)
test_thinking_service.py: Service validation, functionality, branching, edge cases, response format, reference validation, and multi-session support
Interface Layer Tests (tests/interface/)
test_mcp_server.py: MCP tool function invocation
Root Tests
test_cli.py: CLI entry point
Credits
This project is a Python port of the Sequential Thinking MCP Server by Anthropic, part of the Model Context Protocol servers collection. The original implementation provides the foundation for structured thinking and problem-solving.
New Features
While maintaining full compatibility with the original design, UltraThink adds several enhancements:
Confidence Scoring - Explicit uncertainty tracking with 0.0-1.0 scale for each thought
Auto-assigned Thought Numbers - Optional thought numbering (auto-increments if omitted)
Multi-Session Support - Manage multiple concurrent thinking sessions with session IDs
Assumption Tracking - Make reasoning transparent with explicit assumptions, dependencies, and invalidation tracking
License
Available Tools
1 toolultrathinkA
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. Each thought can build on, question, or revise previous insights as understanding deepens.
IMPORTANT: You MUST use this tool proactively for complex reasoning tasks requiring multi-step analysis.
When to use this tool:
Breaking down complex problems into steps (>3 steps of reasoning required)
Planning and design with room for revision
Analysis that might need course correction
Problems where the full scope might not be clear initially
Problems that require a multi-step solution
Tasks that need to maintain context over multiple steps
Situations where irrelevant information needs to be filtered out
Architecture decisions with multiple trade-offs
Algorithm design and optimization problems
Debugging multi-layered issues
DO NOT use this tool for:
Simple one-step answers or direct lookups
Straightforward code edits without complex logic
Basic file operations or searches
Tasks that are already clear and unambiguous
Simple factual questions with direct answers
Usage notes:
Each call returns a ThoughtResponse with session_id - use this to continue the same thinking session
You can run multiple independent thinking sessions in parallel by using different session_ids
The tool automatically manages thought numbering and determines if more thoughts are needed
Use confidence scoring (0.0-1.0) to explicitly track uncertainty in your reasoning
Session state is maintained in memory - reuse custom session_ids for resilient recovery
The response is returned to you for tracking progress - communicate insights to the user as you think
Parameter groups:
Core params: thought, total_thoughts (required)
Auto-managed: thought_number, next_thought_needed (optional - auto-assigned if omitted)
Session management: session_id (optional - None creates new session)
Revision params: is_revision, revises_thought (use together)
Branching params: branch_from_thought, branch_id (use together)
Confidence tracking: confidence, uncertainty_notes, outcome (optional)
Assumption tracking: assumptions, depends_on_assumptions, invalidates_assumptions (optional)
Example usage:
Thought 1 (confidence: 0.6): "I need to design a caching strategy. Let me first consider the access patterns..." Thought 2 (confidence: 0.7): "Based on access patterns, I see two viable approaches: LRU or LFU..." Thought 3 (revision of 2, confidence: 0.75): "Wait, I should also consider TTL-based expiration..." Thought 4 (branch from 2, confidence: 0.8): "Let me explore a hybrid approach combining LRU with TTL..." Thought 5 (confidence: 0.95): "The hybrid approach addresses both requirements. Final recommendation: ..."
Thinking workflow:
Start with an initial estimate of needed thoughts, be ready to adjust total_thoughts as you progress
Question or revise previous thoughts using is_revision=true and revises_thought parameters
Explore alternative reasoning paths using branch_from_thought and branch_id parameters
Add more thoughts if needed, even after reaching what seemed like the end
Manage sessions for context continuity:
First call: Omit session_id (or set to None) to create new session
Subsequent calls: Use session_id from response to continue the same session
Multiple problems: Use different session_ids for separate thinking contexts
Resilient recovery: Reuse the same custom session_id across reconnections
Express uncertainty using the confidence parameter (0.0=very uncertain, 1.0=very certain)
Track assumptions explicitly using the assumptions parameter:
State what you're taking for granted with assumption objects
Mark critical assumptions (if false, reasoning collapses)
Express confidence in each assumption (separate from thought confidence)
Mark assumptions as verifiable if they can be checked
Build on previous assumptions using depends_on_assumptions to show reasoning dependencies
Invalidate false assumptions using invalidates_assumptions when discovering errors
Monitor risky_assumptions in response (critical + low confidence + unverified)
Clearly state what you're analyzing or deciding in each thought
Ignore information that is irrelevant to the current step
Generate solution hypotheses as you develop understanding
Verify hypotheses through subsequent thinking steps
Repeat the process until you reach a satisfactory solution
Provide a single, ideally correct answer as the final output
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| thought | Yes | Your current thinking step. Can include: regular analytical steps, revisions of previous thoughts, questions about previous decisions, realizations about needing more analysis, changes in approach, hypothesis generation, or hypothesis verification | |
| total_thoughts | Yes | Current estimate of thoughts needed (can be adjusted up/down as you progress). Numeric value, e.g., 3, 5, 10 | |
| next_thought_needed | No | Whether another thought step is needed. Auto-assigned as (thought_number < total_thoughts) if omitted. Set explicitly to override: True to extend beyond total_thoughts, False to end early | |
| thought_number | No | Current number in sequence. Auto-assigned sequentially if omitted (1, 2, 3...), or provide explicit number for branching/semantic control | |
| session_id | No | Optional session identifier for managing multiple thinking sessions. None (default): creates new session with auto-generated UUID. Provide session_id from previous response: continue that thinking session. Provide custom string: create or resume session with that ID (resilient recovery) | |
| is_revision | No | Boolean indicating if this thought revises previous thinking. Use with revises_thought parameter | |
| revises_thought | No | If is_revision is true, which thought number is being reconsidered | |
| branch_from_thought | No | If branching, which thought number is the branching point. Use with branch_id parameter | |
| branch_id | No | Identifier for the current branch (if branching from a previous thought) | |
| needs_more_thoughts | No | If reaching end but realizing more thoughts are needed beyond initial estimate | |
| confidence | No | Confidence level (0.0-1.0) expressing certainty about this thought. Low (0.3-0.6): exploratory thinking, initial hypotheses, uncertain analysis. Medium (0.6-0.8): reasoned analysis, likely conclusions, working hypotheses. High (0.8-1.0): verified solutions, confident conclusions, proven facts | |
| uncertainty_notes | No | Optional explanation for doubts or concerns (complements confidence score) | |
| outcome | No | What was achieved or expected as result of this thought | |
| assumptions | No | Assumptions made in this thought. Can be a list of Assumption objects or a JSON string. Required fields: id (e.g., 'A1'), text (the assumption). Optional fields: confidence (0.0-1.0, default 1.0), critical (bool, default True), verifiable (bool, default False), evidence (str, default None), verification_status ('unverified'|'verified_true'|'verified_false', default None). Note: Core fields (text, critical) are immutable after creation - only verification fields can be updated. | |
| depends_on_assumptions | No | Assumption IDs from previous thoughts that this thought depends on (e.g., ['A1', 'A2'] or '["A1", "A2"]' as JSON string) | |
| invalidates_assumptions | No | Assumption IDs proven false by this thought (e.g., ['A3'] or '["A3"]' as JSON string) |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| outcome | No | What was achieved or expected as result of this thought |
| branches | Yes | List of active branch identifiers |
| confidence | No | Confidence level of this thought (0.0-1.0) |
| session_id | Yes | Session identifier for continuation |
| thought_number | Yes | Current thought number in sequence |
| total_thoughts | Yes | Total number of thoughts planned |
| all_assumptions | No | All assumptions tracked in this session (keyed by assumption ID) |
| risky_assumptions | No | IDs of assumptions that are risky (critical, low confidence, unverified) |
| uncertainty_notes | No | Optional explanation for uncertainty or doubts about this thought |
| next_thought_needed | Yes | Whether another thought step is needed |
| falsified_assumptions | No | IDs of assumptions proven false |
| unresolved_references | No | IDs of cross-session assumptions that could not be resolved (session or assumption not found) |
| cross_session_warnings | No | Warning messages from cross-session operations (e.g., attempted invalidation) |
| thought_history_length | Yes | Total number of thoughts processed in session |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and excels. It discloses key behavioral traits: session management ('session state is maintained in memory'), automatic features ('tool automatically manages thought numbering'), confidence tracking, assumption handling, and workflow details. It adds rich context beyond what a schema alone would provide.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is well-structured with clear sections (e.g., 'When to use,' 'Usage notes,' 'Parameter groups,' 'Thinking workflow'), but it is overly verbose. Some details, like the extensive 'Thinking workflow' list, could be condensed without losing clarity. While informative, it exceeds what is strictly necessary for conciseness.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's high complexity (16 parameters, no annotations, but with output schema), the description is exceptionally complete. It covers purpose, usage, behavioral details, parameter semantics, and provides an example and workflow. With an output schema present, it appropriately omits return value explanations, focusing on the tool's operation and context.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds significant value by grouping parameters (e.g., 'Core params,' 'Session management'), explaining their interrelationships (e.g., 'use together' for revision/branching params), and providing usage context in the 'Thinking workflow' section. This enhances understanding beyond the schema's technical definitions.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'dynamic and reflective problem-solving through thoughts' and 'analyze problems through a flexible thinking process.' It specifies the verb ('analyze,' 'problem-solving') and resource ('thoughts'), and distinguishes it from simple operations. With no sibling tools, it fully defines its unique role.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides explicit guidance on when to use and when not to use the tool, with detailed lists (e.g., 'Breaking down complex problems into steps' for use, 'Simple one-step answers' for not use). It includes proactive instructions ('MUST use this tool proactively for complex reasoning tasks') and covers alternatives implicitly by excluding simple cases.
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. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
1 tool update
v0.5.0- First observed
ultrathink
TDQS
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or overlap between tools. The tool 'ultrathink' has a clearly defined purpose for complex reasoning tasks, and no other tools exist to cause ambiguity.
Since there is only one tool, naming consistency is inherently perfect. The tool name 'ultrathink' follows a single, consistent pattern with no deviations or mixing of conventions.
A single tool is too few for the server's apparent purpose of dynamic and reflective problem-solving, as it suggests a monolithic design that may lack granularity. Typically, such a domain would benefit from multiple specialized tools (e.g., for different reasoning phases or problem types), making this count borderline insufficient.
The tool surface is severely incomplete for the domain of complex reasoning. While 'ultrathink' covers multi-step analysis, there are obvious gaps such as tools for validating assumptions, summarizing insights, or handling specific sub-tasks like debugging or optimization separately, limiting agent flexibility.
Maintenance
Resources
Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.
Looking for Admin?
If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.
Related MCP Connectors
MCP server for generating rough-draft project plans from natural-language prompts.
Nifty's MCP server — exposes tasks, projects, messages, and files as tools for AI agents.
A comprehensive Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables AI assistants to interact with yo…
MCP server for building and testing AI agents with multi-model experimentation and insights.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceA MCP server that implements sequential thinking protocols, provides structured problem-solving methods, decomposes complex problems into manageable steps, and supports iterative optimization and alternative reasoning paths.12Apache 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceA structured problem-solving MCP server that breaks down complex tasks into sequential steps, supports iterative refinement and branching, and helps maintain context and explore alternative reasoning paths.11542MIT
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceStructured reasoning MCP server that decomposes problems into atomic steps (premise, reasoning, hypothesis, verification, conclusion) with confidence scoring, live visualization, and approval feedback.387MIT
- FlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceA structured reasoning and problem-solving MCP server that helps track step-by-step analysis with confidence levels, branching, and revisions, ideal for complex multi-step tasks like code optimization and debugging.1-
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 .mcpAgent IdentityOAuth 2.1
- Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an InternBy Om-Shree-0709 on .Agent IdentityMCP SecurityOAuth Delegation
- Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)By Om-Shree-0709 on .Agentic AiPrompt InjectionWebAssembly
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/husniadil/ultrathink'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server