corexense-mcp
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
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
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| prompts | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| resources | {
"subscribe": false,
"listChanged": false
} |
| experimental | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| list_scenariosA | List supported synthetic fruit decision scenarios and explicit limits. |
| review_scenarioC | Run bounded local evidence qualification, returning a decision and trace. |
| explain_beliefC | Explain delayed or conflicting synthetic evidence with TWS-Belief. |
| review_episodeC | Review a synthetic fruit episode; cloud use is controlled by the host configuration. |
| review_simulation_episodeC | Audit an explicit FIRA simulation replay bundle; never authorize execution. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 5 tools
Three of the five tools (review_scenario, review_episode, review_simulation_episode) share the same 'review_*' verb and closely related semantics; descriptions differentiate them (local qualification vs. synthetic episode vs. FIRA replay audit), but the scenario-vs-episode boundary remains fuzzy and invites misselection. list_scenarios and explain_belief are clearly distinct.
All five names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (list_scenarios, review_scenario, explain_belief, review_episode, review_simulation_episode). No mixed conventions or casing deviations.
Five tools is well within the sweet spot for a narrowly scoped decision-review server. Each tool maps to a distinct capability (enumeration, review, explanation, episode audit, simulation audit) and none appear redundant padding.
The surface covers enumeration, review, explanation, and replay auditing, but there is no tool to fetch or inspect a specific scenario/episode by identifier, nor to list available episodes or query belief state directly. These are notable gaps that could force agents into dead ends after listing.