Skip to main content
Glama
bluwork

kontra-mcp

by bluwork

Kontra

The Tenth Man Protocol

"If nine agree, I disagree."

An MCP tool that stress-tests your decisions with structured contrarian analysis — so blind spots surface before consequences do.

npm License

What You Get

You say:

"Use kontra to challenge this: We should rewrite our backend from Node.js to Rust. Context: Current stack is Node.js, team of 3, shipping weekly."

Kontra returns:


BLIND SPOTS

  • You're measuring the cost of rewriting but not the cost of pausing. A team of 3 shipping weekly has momentum. The rewrite doesn't just cost engineering hours — it costs 3-6 months of feature development, customer feedback loops, and market positioning that your competitors won't pause for.

  • Rust's safety guarantees solve problems you may not have. If your Node.js backend isn't failing due to memory bugs or concurrency issues, you're optimizing for a class of problems that isn't hurting you. The rewrite is a solution — what's the problem it solves that your team is actually experiencing?

  • The team's Rust proficiency is unproven at production scale. Writing Rust that compiles is not the same as writing Rust that ships. Borrow checker fluency, async runtime decisions (Tokio vs. async-std), ecosystem maturity for your specific domain — these are all unknowns that compound under deadline pressure.

HIDDEN ASSUMPTIONS

...

THE STRONGEST COUNTER-ARGUMENT

...

WHAT-IF SCENARIOS

...


That's counter mode — the default. There are three more.

Related MCP server: io.github.xfloukiex-lab/road-poneglyph

Quick Start

Claude Code

claude mcp add kontra -- npx -y kontra-mcp

Then ask: "Use kontra to analyze my decision to..."

Add to your Claude Desktop config (~/Library/Application Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json on macOS):

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "kontra": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "kontra-mcp"]
    }
  }
}

Add to your MCP settings:

{
  "kontra": {
    "command": "npx",
    "args": ["-y", "kontra-mcp"]
  }
}

Modes

counter — The Tenth Man

"Consensus is never to be mistaken for correctness."

The default. Assumes your decision is wrong and builds the strongest possible case against it.

Produces: Blind Spots, Hidden Assumptions, The Strongest Counter-Argument, What-If Scenarios

Best for: Major decisions where you need someone to steelman the opposing side. Architecture choices, strategy pivots, hiring plans, product bets.


probe — The Interrogator

"A good question does more damage to a bad decision than any argument ever could."

Asks 7-10 pointed questions across five lenses — no answers, no analysis, just the questions you haven't asked yourself.

Produces: Questions across Motivation, Evidence, Alternatives, Stakes, and Timing

Best for: Early-stage decisions where you suspect your reasoning has gaps but aren't sure where. Forces you to confront what you've skipped over.


redteam — The Red Team Commander

"Think like an adversary — not a hypothetical one, but a specific, intelligent opponent who wants this decision to fail."

Constructs 3-5 concrete failure scenarios with likelihood ratings, trigger events, cascade sequences, early warning signs, and mitigations.

Produces: Ranked failure scenarios with likelihood estimates, plus an Overall Vulnerability Assessment (1-10 scale)

Best for: Plans that are already in motion. Launch timelines, migration strategies, organizational changes — anything where you need to know exactly how it breaks.


premortem — The Postmortem From the Future

"Prospective hindsight increases the ability to identify reasons for future outcomes by 30%."

Imagines the decision was made 12 months ago and failed catastrophically. Writes the full postmortem.

Produces: Executive Summary, What Happened (Failure Narrative), Timeline, Root Causes, Signals We Missed, Lessons Learned

Best for: High-stakes, hard-to-reverse decisions. Useful when the team is confident and you need to break the spell of inevitability.

Usage

Counter a strategy decision:

"Use kontra to challenge this: We're going all-in on AI agents for our product roadmap."

Probe a career move:

"Use kontra in probe mode to question my decision to leave my job and start a SaaS company. Context: I have 8 months of runway, no co-founder, and a B2B idea with 3 LOIs."

Red team a launch plan:

"Use kontra in redteam mode against our plan to launch in 6 weeks. Context: We have no staging environment, 40% test coverage, and one DevOps engineer."

Pre-mortem a hiring decision:

"Use kontra in premortem mode on: We're hiring 5 junior engineers instead of 2 seniors. Context: Current team is 4 seniors, shipping velocity is the bottleneck."

Tool Parameters

Parameter

Type

Required

Description

statement

string

Yes

The decision, plan, or conclusion to analyze

context

string

No

Additional background, constraints, or data

mode

enum

No

counter (default), probe, redteam, or premortem

What This Is NOT

  • Not a pros-and-cons generator. Kontra doesn't weigh both sides. It attacks one side — yours — with full force.

  • Not a risk assessment framework. No probability matrices or color-coded dashboards. Structured argumentation, not bureaucratic process.

  • Not a generic "be careful" warning. Every output is specific to your decision and context. No boilerplate applies-to-anything advice.

  • Not a replacement for human judgment. Kontra surfaces what you might miss. You still decide.

How It Works

Kontra uses the prompt-return pattern. When called, it constructs a carefully engineered adversarial prompt and returns it as the tool response. Your MCP client's own LLM processes the prompt and produces the analysis.

  • No API keys needed — uses your client's existing LLM

  • No additional network calls — prompt is returned, not executed

  • Works with any MCP client — Claude Desktop, Claude Code, Cursor, VS Code

Analysis quality scales with model capability. Stronger models produce sharper, more specific contrarian analysis.

Configuration

Environment Variable

Default

Description

KONTRA_DEFAULT_MODE

counter

Default analysis mode

KONTRA_LOG_LEVEL

info

Log verbosity (debug | info | warn | error)

License

Apache-2.0

Available Tools

1 tool
kontraA

The Tenth Man Protocol — structured contrarian analysis. Challenges your decisions by identifying blind spots, hidden assumptions, counter-arguments, and failure scenarios. Provide a statement to analyze and optionally additional context.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statementYesThe decision, plan, or conclusion to analyze
contextNoAdditional background, constraints, or data relevant to the decision
modeNoAnalysis mode: "counter" for contrarian analysis, "probe" for deep questioning, "redteam" for adversarial testing, "premortem" for failure scenario analysis.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It describes the analytical function but does not disclose behavioral traits such as side effects (e.g., read-only, destructive), required permissions, or rate limits. The user is left to infer that it is a reasoning tool with no mutations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the tool's name and purpose. Every sentence adds value: the first explains the methodology, the second instructs on usage. No unnecessary words or repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the lack of output schema and sibling tools, the description covers the basic usage and purpose. However, it does not explain the return value format (e.g., text output) or offer guidance on selecting among the four modes. It is minimally complete but leaves gaps for a new user.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description reiterates the statement and context parameters and lists modes, but does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema descriptions. It provides a summary of how to use parameters but no extra detail like format or constraints.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: structured contrarian analysis to challenge decisions. It specifies the resource (decisions/plans/statements) and the action (challenge, identify blind spots), making it highly specific and distinctive even without sibling tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for analyzing decisions and optionally adding context, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (though no siblings exist). It doesn't provide 'when not to use' or scenarios, making it adequate but not explicit.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. 1 tool updatev0.1.1
    • First observedkontra

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or overlap between tools.

Naming Consistency5/5

A single tool named 'kontra' is consistent; no conflicting naming conventions exist.

Tool Count3/5

A single tool for contrarian analysis is minimal but may suffice for a narrowly defined purpose. However, typical MCP servers benefit from 3-15 tools, and 1 tool feels thin.

Completeness5/5

The tool covers the entire domain of structured contrarian analysis, including blind spots, assumptions, counter-arguments, and failure scenarios. No obvious gaps exist for its stated purpose.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/bluwork/kontra-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server