Loading ToolBench
A symbolic reasoning engine that serves as an MCP server for symbolic ontology operations
This server has moderate definition quality with consistent naming conventions and basic descriptions, but significant gaps in parameter documentation and output schema definition. All 12 tools follow verb-noun naming (get_, create_, update_, delete_, search_, filter_), and most have short descriptions (10-50 chars). However, parameter descriptions are sparse, output schemas are not documented in the tool definitions, and there is no explicit error handling or recovery guidance. The tools appear to be properly registered in src/index.ts with schemas, but the source code for actual tool implementations is not provided, limiting assessment of output structure and error messages. The test file (test-tools-only.js) demonstrates tool functionality but shows JSON stringified responses without explicit field documentation, making it impossible to verify downstream composability.
Create a new symbol
Create a new symbol set
Delete a symbol (with optional cascade)
Filter symbols by category
Get all available categories
Get a symbol by ID
List symbol sets with optional limit
List symbols with optional limit
Output schemas not documented. Tool definitions show input schemas but no documented output structure. Test file shows tools return JSON with fields like 'count', 'symbols', 'symbol_sets', 'categories' but this is not declared in tool registration. LLMs cannot plan downstream tool calls or extract the right fields from responses.
Destructive tool (delete_symbol) lacks confirmation/dry-run pattern. Tool accepts a 'cascade' boolean parameter but provides no mechanism for agents to verify intent before deletion. No error handling guidance if deletion fails.
No pagination documentation in tool descriptions. List/search tools (get_symbols, search_symbols, get_symbol_sets, search_symbol_sets) accept a 'limit' parameter defaulting to 10, but descriptions do not mention pagination, total count, or next_cursor. Unclear how to retrieve > limit results.
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-22 | C | 65 | 2026-07-28+ | v2 |
| 2026-03-09 | F | 0 | - | v1 |
Search symbol sets by text query
Search symbols by text query
Update an existing symbol
Update an existing symbol set
Parameter descriptions are minimal or generic. Example: filter_by_category 'category' param has description 'Category to filter by', does not specify valid category values, acceptable format, or where to discover category names. LLM must guess or retry with trial values.
No error handling or recovery guidance in any tool description. Descriptions state WHAT the tool does but not what errors may occur, how to interpret them, or what the LLM should do if the tool fails. Example: create_symbol has no mention of duplicate ID handling, validation errors, or cascading side effects.
Tool composition unclear. Creating a symbol with 'related_symbols' parameter requires passing an array of symbol IDs, but there is no documented way for an LLM to discover valid symbol IDs except by calling get_symbols first. Chaining IDs should be embedded in responses.
Idempotency not declared. Tools like update_symbol and create_symbol do not explicitly state whether they are idempotent (safe to retry) or have side effects. Agents need this information to decide on retry strategy.