Skip to main content
Glama
marioluciofjr

MCP-Server de Mapas Mentais

by marioluciofjr
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python
Local

problemas

Generate a mind map for problem analysis related to your topic to visualize and organize challenges systematically.

Instructions

Gera um mapa mental de análise de problemas relacionados ao tema.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
temaYes

Implementation Reference

  • server.py:32-42 (handler)
    The handler function for the 'problemas' tool. It takes a 'tema' parameter and returns a formatted string representing a mind map for analyzing problems related to the theme, including definition, causes, solutions, resources, and implementation steps.
    @mcp.tool(name="problemas")
def problemas(tema: str) -> str:
    """Gera um mapa mental de análise de problemas relacionados ao tema."""
    return (
        f"Análise de problemas sobre {tema}, focando somente nos tópicos abaixo:\n"
        f"- Definição do problema\n"
        f"- Possíveis causas\n"
        f"- Soluções propostas\n"
        f"- Recursos necessários\n"
        f"- Etapas de implementação de possíveis soluções"
    )

Tool Definition Quality

C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool generates a mind map but doesn't describe what the output looks like (e.g., format, structure), whether it's a read-only or mutative operation, or any constraints like rate limits or permissions. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool, though it could be more front-loaded with additional context if needed. The structure is clear but minimal.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (simple with 1 parameter), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the return values (e.g., what the mind map output entails), behavioral traits, or detailed parameter usage. For a tool with no structured data support, the description should provide more comprehensive context to guide the agent effectively.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The input schema has 1 parameter ('tema') with 0% description coverage in the schema itself. The tool description mentions 'related to the theme', which loosely maps to the 'tema' parameter, but doesn't add meaningful semantics such as what constitutes a valid theme, examples, or constraints. With low schema coverage, the description fails to adequately compensate for the lack of parameter documentation.

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 the tool 'generates a mind map for problem analysis related to the theme', which provides a clear verb ('generates') and resource ('mind map'). However, it doesn't distinguish this from sibling tools like 'apresenta' or 'compara', leaving the specific differentiation unclear. The purpose is understandable but lacks sibling context.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'apresenta' or 'compara'. It implies usage for problem analysis related to a theme, but doesn't specify prerequisites, exclusions, or comparative contexts with other tools. This leaves the agent with minimal direction for tool selection.

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/marioluciofjr/mapas_mentais_mcp'

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