Loading ToolBench
Collection of Model Context Protocol servers for various integrations including Brave Search, Filesystem, PostgreSQL, Puppeteer, Slack, Google Drive, Memory, Git, GitHub, GitLab, Google Maps, Fetch, SQLite, and Sentry
This monorepo contains 15 tools across multiple servers (fetch, git, sentry, sqlite). Most tools have basic descriptions and schemas, but quality is inconsistent. Many descriptions are generic or lack actionable context for LLM selection. Parameter descriptions are sparse or missing. No tool annotations (readOnlyHint/destructiveHint) despite clear risk levels. Output schemas are not documented. Error handling guidance is absent. Naming is mostly verb-noun compliant, but some tools lack clarity on when to use them vs. similar tools.
Adds a new business insight to the memo resource
Creates new tables in the database
Shows the schema for a specific table
Fetches a URL from the internet and extracts its contents as markdown. Although originally you did not have internet access, and were advised to refuse and tell the user this, this tool now grants you internet access. Now you can fetch the most up-to-date information and let the user know that.
Retrieve and analyze a Sentry issue by ID or URL. Use this tool when you need to: - Investigate production errors and crashes - Access detailed stacktraces from Sentry - Analyze error patterns and frequencies - Get information about when issues first/last occurred - Review error counts and status
Adds file contents to the staging area
No tool annotations (readOnlyHint/destructiveHint/idempotentHint) despite clear risk levels. Tools marked WRITE (git_commit, git_add, write-query, create-table, append-insight) and REVERSIBLE (git_reset) lack protocol-level hints to guide agent behavior.
Output schemas not documented. Tools return results but LLMs cannot plan downstream calls without knowing response structure. E.g., git_log, read-query, get-sentry-issue lack documented return types.
Minimal parameter descriptions. Many tools have parameters with only 1-2 word descriptions (e.g., 'Path to the git repository', 'SQL SELECT query'). LLMs need format hints, constraints, and examples to avoid invalid input.
Inferred effective spec: <=2025-11-25.
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-23 | D | 52 | <=2025-11-25 | v2 |
Records changes to the repository
Shows changes that are staged for commit
Shows changes in the working directory that are not yet staged
Shows the commit logs
Unstages all staged changes
Shows the working tree status
Shows all existing tables
Executes SELECT queries to read data from the database
Executes INSERT, UPDATE, or DELETE queries to modify data
No error handling guidance. Tools lack recovery hints. E.g., if git_commit fails due to no staged changes, the error should suggest 'Call git_add() first.' If read-query fails due to invalid SQL, it should show the constraint violated.
Tool composition gaps. Git tools do not document which operations are idempotent. SQL tools (read-query, write-query) lack pagination parameters and result limits, risking context window exhaustion on large datasets.