logictree
Server Quality Checklist
Latest release: v0.1.0
- Disambiguation3/5
The internal operations are mostly distinct, but get_status, next_steps, and quick_analysis all return guidance/next-step information, while analyze_tree, generate_hypotheses, and suggest_actions overlap in analytical purpose. The descriptions help clarify intended use, but the boundaries are not crisp.
Naming Consistency4/5Operation names use consistent snake_case and mostly follow a verb_noun pattern such as add_node, update_node, and visualize_tree. Minor exceptions like next_steps and quick_analysis break the pattern, and the single MCP tool name 'logictree' is not verb-based, but overall the naming is systematic.
Tool Count2/5A single MCP tool bundles ten operations across three feature categories, which is far too coarse for the breadth of the server's purpose. The operations should be exposed as separate MCP tools rather than hidden behind an 'operation' string.
Completeness4/5The internal operations cover the core logic-tree lifecycle: create, update, delete, visualize, analyze, generate hypotheses, and suggest actions. There are minor gaps like no dedicated single-node retrieval or export/import capability, but the domain is generally well covered.
Average 3.6/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.
See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.
- No community issues in the last 6 months
- 0 commits in the last 12 weeks
- No stable releases found
- No critical vulnerability alerts
- No high-severity vulnerability alerts
- No code scanning findings
- CI status not available
Add a LICENSE file by following GitHub's guide. Once GitHub recognizes the license, the system will automatically detect it within a few hours.
If the license does not appear after some time, you can manually trigger a new scan using the MCP server admin interface.
MCP servers without a LICENSE cannot be installed.
This repository includes a README.md file.
No tool usage detected in the last 30 days. Usage tracking helps demonstrate server value.
Tip: use the "Try in Browser" feature on the server page to seed initial usage.
Add a glama.json file to provide metadata about your server.
If you are the author, simply .
If the server belongs to an organization, first add
glama.jsonto the root of your repository:{ "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/server.json", "maintainers": [ "your-github-username" ] }Then . Browse examples.
Add related servers to improve discoverability.
How to sync the server with GitHub?
Servers are automatically synced at least once per day, but you can also sync manually at any time to instantly update the server profile.
To manually sync the server, click the "Sync Server" button in the MCP server admin interface.
How is the quality score calculated?
The overall quality score combines two components: Tool Definition Quality (70%) and Server Coherence (30%).
Tool Definition Quality measures how well each tool describes itself to AI agents. Every tool is scored 1–5 across six dimensions: Purpose Clarity (25%), Usage Guidelines (20%), Behavioral Transparency (20%), Parameter Semantics (15%), Conciseness & Structure (10%), and Contextual Completeness (10%). The server-level definition quality score is calculated as 60% mean TDQS + 40% minimum TDQS, so a single poorly described tool pulls the score down.
Server Coherence evaluates how well the tools work together as a set, scoring four dimensions equally: Disambiguation (can agents tell tools apart?), Naming Consistency, Tool Count Appropriateness, and Completeness (are there gaps in the tool surface?).
Tiers are derived from the overall score: A (≥3.5), B (≥3.0), C (≥2.0), D (≥1.0), F (<1.0). B and above is considered passing.
Tool Scores
- Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It does reveal meaningful traits: remove_node deletes a node and all descendants (destructive behavior), quick_analysis is intentionally focused to avoid overwhelming output, and guidance operations return AI recommendations and exact parameter templates. However, it does not cover persistence, preconditions/permissions, error behavior, or side effects of analyze_tree and generate_hypotheses.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness2/5Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is heavily redundant: the Main Features list largely restates the command catalog, the Example AI Session re-walks the Workflow Integration steps, and closing lines like 'This design ensures AI continues using the tool' are self-promotional rather than operational. It is well-structured with headers and emojis, but at roughly 700 words for a simple workflow, many sentences do not earn their place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The description is broad for a complex 7-parameter/11-operation tool with no output schema: nearly every operation is described in prose and response shapes are hinted at ('Response includes: current state, AI guidance'). However, move_node is absent from the command catalog despite appearing in the schema enum, and per-operation parameter requirements and return content are only sketched. These gaps matter more precisely because no output schema exists to fill them.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters3/5Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all seven parameters and the nested metadata object, placing this at baseline 3. The description adds limited value through concrete payload templates such as add_node with content/nodeType and solution nodes with parentId plus metadata priority/feasibility. These examples illustrate valid combinations but largely duplicate what the schema already conveys.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose4/5Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly frames the tool as an AI-guided hierarchical problem analysis system that breaks complex problems into structured logic trees. It enumerates ten named operations grouped into AI Guidance, Basic, and Advanced categories, making its scope explicit. As a multi-operation umbrella tool with no siblings to differentiate from, the stated purpose plus the internal command catalog give an agent a solid model of what the tool does.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines5/5Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The 'AI Workflow Integration' section prescribes explicit invocation rules: always start with get_status, run quick_analysis after each major action, and call next_steps when unsure. The 'START HERE' labeling and the ordered workflow give concrete when-to-use conditions for each operation. No sibling tools exist, so external routing is moot, but internal command selection guidance is exceptionally concrete and actionable.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
GitHub Badge
Glama performs regular codebase and documentation scans to:
- Confirm that the MCP server is working as expected.
- Confirm that there are no obvious security issues.
- Evaluate tool definition quality.
Our badge communicates server capabilities, safety, and installation instructions.
Card Badge
Copy to your README.md:
Score Badge
Copy to your README.md:
Latest Blog Posts
- Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)By Om-Shree-0709 on .mcpAgent IdentityOAuth 2.1
- Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an InternBy Om-Shree-0709 on .Agent IdentityMCP SecurityOAuth Delegation
- Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)By Om-Shree-0709 on .Agentic AiPrompt InjectionWebAssembly
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/mostlyfine/mcp-logictree'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server