No user-submitted related servers found.
Scored across 37 tools
Most tools target a distinct workflow stage or resource, and descriptions clarify next/record pairings (e.g., next_triage_batch vs. record_triage_scores, next_report vs. record_report). Some boundaries are still fuzzy: review_article vs. record_screening_decisions both record include/exclude judgments, and merge_entities vs. resolve_duplicates overlap in entity-merging intent. These are manageable because the descriptions point to the intended tool.
Names are consistently snake_case and mostly follow verb_noun or stage_resource patterns (start_search, record_extraction, next_synthesis, bot_finish). Minor deviations exist: project_settings and wiki_tasks are noun phrases, guide is a bare verb, and next_* tools use an adjective_noun form rather than a verb. The convention is still predictable overall.
With 37 tools, the surface is very heavy, and many operations are split into granular next_* and record_* pairs that could be consolidated. The multi-stage systematic-review domain justifies breadth, but the current count exceeds what an agent can comfortably navigate and likely includes several low-frequency tools. This is over-scoped for practical tool selection.
The surface covers a full review lifecycle: project management, question validation, search/resume, triage and screening, fetch, extraction, entity resolution, synthesis, wiki export, reporting, and evaluation. Minor gaps remain, such as no explicit project update/delete or dedicated criteria-viewing operation, but agents can work around them through existing record/settings tools.