agent-reasoning-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

assess_risk

Read-onlyIdempotent

Compute quantitative risk and threat assessment for actions, plans, or 3D spatial rollouts against utility weights. Use to estimate failure probability and threat exposure.

Instructions

Compute quantitative risk and threat assessment for candidate actions, plans, or 3D spatial rollouts against active utility weights (actions: action, plan, compare, spatial_rollout). Use assess_risk instead of evaluate_situation when estimating failure probability and threat exposure rather than ranking overall utility.

Returns risk score (0.0-1.0), threat breakdown, and comparative risk ratings.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`action`	Yes	Risk assessment mode: action, plan, compare, spatial_rollout
`project`	No	Target project slug
`obstacles`	No	Obstacles with position/bounding_box and affordance_mask
`parameters`	No	Action parameters
`trajectory`	No	Array of [x, y, z] waypoints for spatial rollout risk assessment
`candidate_action`	No	Action name to evaluate
`candidate_actions`	No	Multiple actions to compare risk scores
`situation_context`	No	Current environment telemetry & vitals
`clearance_threshold`	No	Minimum clearance threshold in meters (default: 1.0)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed5 schema fields changedv0.4.0Oct 3, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / action / description

Previous value: -"Risk assessment mode: action, plan, compare"New value: +"Risk assessment mode: action, plan, compare, spatial_rollout"

changedInput schema / properties / action / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "action",
-  "plan",
-  "compare"
-]New value: +[
+  "action",
+  "plan",
+  "compare",
+  "spatial_rollout"
+]

addedInput schema / properties / clearance_threshold

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Minimum clearance threshold in meters (default: 1.0)",
+  "type": "number"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / obstacles

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Obstacles with position/bounding_box and affordance_mask",
+  "items": {},
+  "type": "array"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / trajectory

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Array of [x, y, z] waypoints for spatial rollout risk assessment",
+  "items": {
+    "items": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "type": "array"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.3.1Oct 1, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / action / description

Previous value: -"Risk assessment mode"New value: +"Risk assessment mode: action, plan, compare"

addedInput schema / properties / action / enum

Added value: +[
+  "action",
+  "plan",
+  "compare"
+]

Changed16 schema fields changedv0.2.1Sep 24, 2026
- removedInput schema / $schema
```
Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
```
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
- addedInput schema / properties / action / description
```
Added value: +"Risk assessment mode"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / action / enum
```
Removed value: -[
-  "action",
-  "plan",
-  "compare"
-]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / candidate_action / description
```
Added value: +"Action name to evaluate"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / candidate_actions / description
```
Added value: +"Multiple actions to compare risk scores"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / candidate_actions / items / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -true
```
- removedInput schema / properties / candidate_actions / items / properties / parameters / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -true
```
- removedInput schema / properties / candidate_actions / items / properties / parameters / properties
```
Removed value: -{}
```
- removedInput schema / properties / parameters / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -true
```
- addedInput schema / properties / parameters / description
```
Added value: +"Action parameters"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / parameters / properties
```
Removed value: -{}
```
- addedInput schema / properties / project / description
```
Added value: +"Target project slug"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / situation_context / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -true
```
- addedInput schema / properties / situation_context / description
```
Added value: +"Current environment telemetry & vitals"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / situation_context / properties
```
Removed value: -{}
```
First observedv0.1.2Sep 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context: the assessment is computed 'against active utility weights' (a state dependency) and it returns a 0.0-1.0 score with threat breakdown and comparative ratings. It does not describe cost, latency, or what happens when no weights are set, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Three tightly packed sentences with the purpose and routing rule front-loaded. The parenthetical enumeration of modes is mildly redundant with the schema enum, but it aids scanning and costs little.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 9-parameter analyzer with nested objects and no output schema, the description covers purpose, routing, state dependency, and the shape of the return value (score range, threat breakdown, comparative ratings). Only edge behaviors, such as missing utility weights or invalid trajectories, are unaddressed.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all nine parameters including the mode enum, trajectory waypoints, and clearance_threshold default. The description's parenthetical mode list and mention of '3D spatial rollouts' restate the schema rather than adding format or constraint detail. Baseline 3 is correct.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb+resource ('Compute quantitative risk and threat assessment') and scopes the accepted modes. It explicitly names the sibling it is not, so an agent can separate assess_risk from evaluate_situation without opening either schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives an explicit routing rule: 'Use assess_risk instead of evaluate_situation when estimating failure probability and threat exposure rather than ranking overall utility.' This names the alternative and the condition that selects it, leaving nothing to inference.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

assess_risk

Instructions

Input Schema

Schema Changelog

TDQS

Other Tools