No user-submitted related servers found.
Scored across 11 tools
Tools target distinct stages of the research lifecycle and the descriptions explicitly resolve the riskiest overlap (research creates a new thread vs follow_up continues an existing one; research_status vs get_results distinguish progress from output). The only mild overlap is usage (spend analytics) versus balance (credit balance), but both descriptions make the boundary clear.
All names are snake_case, but verb styles are mixed: some are verb_noun (get_results, list_threads, search_claims, get_claim_evidence), some are bare nouns (research, usage, balance), and one is noun_status (research_status). It remains readable, but the pattern is not predictable.
Eleven tools sit squarely in the well-scoped 3-15 range. Each tool maps to a distinct capability (submit, poll, retrieve, follow up, browse threads, inspect claims, list providers, view spend/balance) with no filler.
The surface covers the full research lifecycle: submission, status polling, result retrieval, follow-ups, thread history, claim/evidence inspection, provider listing, and usage/billing. Minor gaps exist (no explicit cancel-job or delete-thread operation), but agents can work around these.