Skip to main content
Glama
j0hanz

cortex-mcp

by j0hanz
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Local

Reasoning Think

reasoning_think

Decompose complex problems into sequential reasoning steps. Start a new session with query and depth level, then continue step-by-step using the returned session ID until completion.

Instructions

Structured multi-step reasoning tool. Decomposes analysis into sequential thought steps stored in a persistent session trace.

USAGE PATTERN:

  1. Start: { query: "...", level: "basic"|"normal"|"high"|"expert", thought: "your analysis..." }

  2. Continue: { sessionId: "", thought: "next step..." } — level is optional; session level is used

  3. Repeat until status: "completed" — the summary field contains the exact next call to make

IMPORTANT: Pass the returned sessionId on every continuation call. The thought parameter stores YOUR reasoning verbatim — write thorough analysis in each step. Use stepSummary for a 1-sentence conclusion per step — these accumulate in the summary field for navigation.

Levels: basic (1–3 steps, 2K budget), normal (4–8 steps, 8K budget), high (10–15 steps, 32K budget), expert (20–25 steps, 128K budget). Alternatives: runMode="run_to_completion" (batch, basic level only), or observation/hypothesis/evaluation fields (structured). Errors: E_SESSION_NOT_FOUND (expired — start new), E_INVALID_THOUGHT_COUNT (check level ranges).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNoQuestion or problem to analyze.
levelNoDepth level. Required for new sessions. basic (1–3 steps, 2K budget), normal (4–8 steps, 8K budget), high (10–15 steps, 32K budget), expert (20–25 steps, 128K budget).
targetThoughtsNoExact step count. Must fit level range.
sessionIdNoSession ID to continue.
runModeNo"step" (default) or "run_to_completion" (basic level only).
thoughtNoReasoning text. Stored verbatim. String for step mode, string[] for batch.
isConclusionNoEnd session early at final answer.
rollbackToStepNo0-based index to rollback to. Discards later thoughts.
stepSummaryNoOne-sentence step summary.
observationNoKnown facts at this step.
hypothesisNoProposed next idea.
evaluationNoCritique of hypothesis.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYes
resultNo
errorNo

Tool Definition Quality

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations are all false, and the description adds extensive behavioral context: thought is stored verbatim, sessionId must be passed on continuation, levels have step and budget ranges, and the summary field contains the next call. No contradictions with annotations.

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 well-structured with sections (usage pattern, levels, alternatives, errors) and front-loaded with the main purpose. It is fairly long but each section earns its place. Slightly verbose, but still efficient.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the complexity (12 parameters, 100% schema coverage, output schema exists), the description covers all necessary aspects: workflow, levels, budgets, errors, and alternatives. It is complete for an agent to correctly select and invoke the tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. However, the description adds significant workflow context (e.g., usage of sessionId, thought, stepSummary, and the difference between step and batch modes) that enhances understanding beyond the schema. This justifies a score of 4.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states it is a 'Structured multi-step reasoning tool' and explains it decomposes analysis into sequential thought steps stored in a persistent session trace. There are no sibling tools, so differentiation is not needed. The purpose is specific and unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides a detailed usage pattern with start/continue/repeat steps, explicitly mentions alternatives like runMode='run_to_completion' and structured fields (observation/hypothesis/evaluation), and lists error codes. This gives clear guidance on when to use the tool and how to proceed.

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/j0hanz/cortex-mcp'

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