Skip to main content
Glama
marioluciofjr

MCP-Server de Mapas Mentais

by marioluciofjr
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python
Local

revisa

Generate a mind map to review content on any topic, helping organize ideas visually for better retention and understanding.

Instructions

Gera um mapa mental para revisão de conteúdo sobre um tema.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
temaYes

Implementation Reference

  • server.py:21-21 (registration)
    Registers the revisa function as an MCP tool with the name 'revisa' using the FastMCP decorator.
    @mcp.tool(name="revisa")
  • server.py:22-29 (handler)
    The handler function for the 'revisa' tool. Takes a theme string and returns a formatted mind map prompt for reviewing content on that theme, structured with main topic, subtopics, details, and examples.
    def revisa(tema: str) -> str:
    """Gera um mapa mental para revisão de conteúdo sobre um tema."""
    return (
        f"Revisão de {tema}, focando somente nos tópicos abaixo:\n"
        f"- Tópico principal: {tema}\n"
        f"- Subtópicos como ramos principais\n"
        f"- Detalhes e exemplos como ramos secundários"
    )
  • server.py:22-22 (schema)
    Input schema: tema (str), Output: str. Defined via type annotations on the handler function.
    def revisa(tema: str) -> str:

Tool Definition Quality

C2.9/5.0
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. While 'gera' (generates) implies a creation operation, the description doesn't specify whether this is a read-only or mutative action, what permissions might be required, whether the output is stored or temporary, or any rate limits. It mentions the output type (mind map) but not its format or structure.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence in Portuguese that directly states the tool's function. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core action, with no unnecessary words or redundant information. Every word earns its place.

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 complexity (a tool that generates a mind map), lack of annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the mind map output looks like, how it's structured, whether it's visual or textual, or any behavioral aspects like error handling. For a generative tool with no structured data, this leaves significant gaps.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The description adds minimal meaning beyond the input schema. It mentions 'tema' (topic) as the subject for the mind map, which aligns with the single parameter 'tema' in the schema. However, with 0% schema description coverage, the parameter is undocumented in the schema, and the description doesn't elaborate on what constitutes a valid 'tema' or provide examples. The baseline is 3 since schema coverage is low but the description partially compensates.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Gera um mapa mental para revisão de conteúdo sobre um tema' (Generates a mind map for content review on a topic). It specifies the verb ('gera' - generates), resource ('mapa mental' - mind map), and context ('revisão de conteúdo' - content review). However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'apresenta' or 'compara', which likely have different functions.

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. It doesn't mention when this tool is appropriate, when to use sibling tools instead, or any prerequisites. The context is implied (content review on a topic) but lacks explicit usage boundaries.

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