Skip to main content
Glama
xiaobenyang-com

Structured-Argumentation

by xiaobenyang-com
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

Server Configuration

Describes the environment variables required to run the server.

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
XBY_APIKEYYes你的实际apikey (Your actual API key)

Instructions

Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.

This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.

Capabilities

Server capabilities have not been inspected yet.

Tools

Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions

NameDescription
structuredArgumentationA

A detailed tool for systematic dialectical reasoning and argument analysis. This tool helps analyze complex questions through formal argumentation structures. It facilitates the creation, critique, and synthesis of competing arguments.

When to use this tool:

  • Evaluating competing perspectives and claims

  • Analyzing complex ethical dilemmas

  • Assessing policy proposals with multiple stakeholders

  • Exploring scientific hypotheses and counter-arguments

Key features:

  • Break down arguments into claims, premises, and conclusions

  • Track relationships between arguments

  • Represent objections and rebuttals

  • Facilitate dialectical progression through thesis-antithesis-synthesis

  • Evaluate argument strengths and weaknesses

  • Visualize argument structures

Parameters explained:

  • claim: The central proposition being argued

  • premises: Supporting evidence or assumptions

  • conclusion: The logical consequence of accepting the claim

  • argumentType: Whether this is a thesis, antithesis, synthesis, objection, or rebuttal

  • confidence: Your confidence level in this argument (0.0-1.0)

  • respondsTo: ID of an argument this directly responds to

  • supports/contradicts: IDs of arguments this supports or contradicts

  • strengths/weaknesses: Notable strong or weak points of the argument

  • nextArgumentNeeded: Whether another argument is needed in the dialectic

Prompts

Interactive templates invoked by user choice

NameDescription

No prompts

Resources

Contextual data attached and managed by the client

NameDescription

No resources

Deploy Server
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Scored across 1 tool

Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or overlap between tools. The single tool 'structuredArgumentation' has a clearly defined purpose for systematic dialectical reasoning and argument analysis, so agents cannot misselect among non-existent alternatives.

Naming Consistency5/5

Since there is only one tool, naming consistency is inherently perfect. The tool name 'structuredArgumentation' follows a clear and descriptive pattern (adjective+noun), and there are no other tools to compare it against for inconsistency.

Tool Count2/5

A single tool is generally too few for a server's purpose, especially one as broad as 'Structured-Argumentation' which involves complex reasoning tasks. While the tool is feature-rich, having only one tool limits flexibility and forces all operations through a single interface, which feels thin for the apparent scope.

Completeness3/5

The tool covers a wide range of argumentation features (creation, critique, synthesis, visualization), but as a single tool, it may lack granular operations. For example, there are no separate tools for specific tasks like listing arguments, updating confidence scores, or managing argument hierarchies, which could lead to inefficiencies or dead ends in complex workflows.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources