MCP server providing tools for geopolitical intelligence, country briefs, risk scores, conflict/cyber/market feeds, and global monitoring data
This MCP server exhibits severe gaps across all definition quality dimensions. The server registers 7 tools, but critical inspection reveals: (1) NO visible input schemas in the provided source code, the Dockerfile and Makefile contain build/deployment configuration but do NOT show tool implementations, parameter validation, or schema definitions; (2) tool descriptions are present but extremely brief (10-40 chars) and lack WHAT/WHEN/output guidance required for LLM planning; (3) parameter descriptions are completely absent, there is no evidence of what parameters these tools accept, their types, constraints, or valid ranges; (4) output schemas are undocumented, it is impossible to determine what fields agents receive after tool invocation; (5) error handling is not visible in the source provided. The Dockerfile shows deployment infrastructure and the Makefile shows build orchestration, but neither reveals the actual tool handler code. Without access to the handler implementations (api/mcp/registry/index.ts is listed as the source file but not provided in full detail), we cannot verify schema compliance.
Retrieves shipping chokepoint status and maritime intelligence
Retrieves live conflict intelligence feeds and warfare updates
Retrieves comprehensive country intelligence briefings
Retrieves cybersecurity incidents and cyber threat intelligence
Retrieves market intelligence, economic indicators, and financial data
Calculates geopolitical and economic risk scores for countries
Lists all available MCP tools and their metadata
No input schemas visible in source. Cannot verify parameter types, descriptions, constraints, or validation rules for any of the 7 tools.
Tool descriptions are extremely brief (10-60 chars) and lack required context: WHAT the tool does, WHEN to use it vs similar tools, and WHAT the output structure is. Descriptions do not guide LLM selection or downstream usage.
No parameter annotations visible. Baseline expectation is that every parameter has a description explaining its purpose, format, constraints, and valid values. None are evident in the provided source.
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-23 | F | 48 | 2026-07-28+ | v2 |
No output schemas documented. Agents cannot plan downstream tool calls or extract the right data without knowing what fields are returned. Critical for tool composition.
Error handling not visible in source. No evidence of recovery guidance, error classification, or actionable error messages that would help agents self-correct.
Tool definitions inferred from registry listing but actual implementation code (api/mcp/registry/index.ts) not provided in detail.