No user-submitted related servers found.
Scored across 63 tools
Many tools have clear roles, but there are several near-duplicate pairs (validate_arxiv_input vs validate_arxiv_request, load_paper/load_arxiv_paper vs workspace_add_*_paper, get_dependencies vs workspace_get_dependencies) that an agent could easily confuse. The external-reference and expansion workflows also use many similar names, making boundaries unclear.
The dominant workspace_verb_noun pattern is readable and consistent, but a significant segment of unprefixed legacy-style tools (load_paper, list_theorems, get_theorem, get_dependencies, where_used, validate_arxiv_*) breaks the convention. It is mixed rather than chaotic, so it still earns a middle score.
With 63 tools, this server is far beyond a typical agent-friendly surface and fits the extreme-count end of the scale. Many tools are workflow-stage variants or duplicates that could be consolidated into fewer, more general operations.
The surface covers the core domain thoroughly: paper ingestion, theorem/dependency extraction, evidence and results, reading sessions/queues, exports, and external reference handling. Minor lifecycle gaps exist (no explicit delete/remove tools for papers, sessions, or queues), but agents can reasonably work around them.