Skip to main content
Glama
spences10
by spences10

mcp-sequentialthinking-qa

An adaptation of the MCP Sequential Thinking Server designed to guide tool usage in QA and verification processes. This server helps break down verification tasks into manageable steps and provides LLM-driven recommendations for which MCP tools would be most effective at each stage.

A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that combines sequential thinking with intelligent tool suggestions for QA tasks. For each step in the verification process, it provides confidence-scored recommendations for which tools to use, along with rationale for why each tool would be appropriate.

Features

  • 🤔 Dynamic and reflective QA problem-solving through sequential thoughts

  • 🔄 Flexible verification process that adapts and evolves

  • 🌳 Support for branching and revision of thoughts

  • 🛠️ LLM-driven intelligent tool recommendations for QA tasks

  • 📊 Confidence scoring for tool suggestions

  • 🔍 Detailed rationale for tool recommendations

  • 📝 Step tracking with expected outcomes

  • 🔄 Progress monitoring with previous and remaining steps

  • 🎯 Alternative tool suggestions for each step

  • 🧠 Memory management with configurable history limits

  • 🗑️ Manual history cleanup capabilities

Related MCP server: Execution Journal

How It Works

This server facilitates sequential thinking with MCP tool coordination for QA and verification tasks. The LLM analyzes available tools and their descriptions to make intelligent recommendations for verification processes, which are then tracked and organized by this server.

The workflow:

  1. LLM provides available MCP tools to the sequential thinking QA server

  2. LLM analyzes each verification step and recommends appropriate tools

  3. Server tracks recommendations, maintains context, and manages memory

  4. LLM executes recommended tools and continues the verification process

Each recommendation includes:

  • A confidence score (0-1) indicating how well the tool matches the verification need

  • A clear rationale explaining why the tool would be helpful for this QA step

  • A priority level to suggest tool execution order

  • Suggested input parameters for the tool

  • Alternative tools that could also be used

The server works with any MCP tools available in your environment and automatically manages memory to prevent unbounded growth.

Example Usage

Here's an example of how the server guides tool usage for QA verification:

{
	"available_mcp_tools": [
		"mcp-filesystem",
		"mcp-playwright",
		"mcp-omnisearch"
	],
	"thought": "Need to verify package version compatibility before implementing configuration",
	"verification_target": "package version compatibility",
	"current_step": {
		"step_description": "Check installed package version in package.json",
		"expected_outcome": "Confirmed package version and dependencies",
		"recommended_tools": [
			{
				"tool_name": "read_file",
				"confidence": 0.95,
				"rationale": "Examine package.json to determine installed version and dependencies",
				"priority": 1,
				"suggested_inputs": {
					"path": "package.json"
				}
			},
			{
				"tool_name": "execute_command",
				"confidence": 0.75,
				"rationale": "Run npm list to verify actually installed versions",
				"priority": 2,
				"alternatives": ["pnpm list", "yarn list"]
			}
		],
		"next_step_conditions": [
			"Version identified",
			"Dependencies verified",
			"Check for breaking changes between versions"
		]
	},
	"thought_number": 1,
	"total_thoughts": 4,
	"next_thought_needed": true
}

The server tracks your progress and supports:

  • Creating branches to explore different verification approaches

  • Revising previous thoughts with new information

  • Maintaining context across multiple verification steps

  • Suggesting next steps based on current findings

  • Adapting to the specific tools available in your environment

Configuration

This server requires configuration through your MCP client. Here are examples for different environments:

Cline Configuration

Add this to your Cline MCP settings:

{
	"mcpServers": {
		"mcp-sequentialthinking-qa": {
			"command": "npx",
			"args": ["-y", "mcp-sequentialthinking-qa"],
			"env": {
				"MAX_HISTORY_SIZE": "1000"
			}
		}
	}
}

Claude Desktop with WSL Configuration

For WSL environments, add this to your Claude Desktop configuration:

{
	"mcpServers": {
		"mcp-sequentialthinking-qa": {
			"command": "wsl.exe",
			"args": [
				"bash",
				"-c",
				"MAX_HISTORY_SIZE=1000 source ~/.nvm/nvm.sh && /home/username/.nvm/versions/node/v20.12.1/bin/npx mcp-sequentialthinking-qa"
			]
		}
	}
}

API

The server implements a single MCP tool with configurable parameters:

sequentialthinking_qa

A tool for QA-focused sequential thinking with intelligent tool recommendations for verification tasks.

Parameters:

  • available_mcp_tools (array, required): Array of MCP tool names available for use (e.g., ["mcp-omnisearch", "mcp-playwright", "mcp-filesystem"])

  • thought (string, required): Your current thinking step in the QA process

  • next_thought_needed (boolean, required): Whether another thought step is needed

  • thought_number (integer, required): Current thought number

  • total_thoughts (integer, required): Estimated total thoughts needed

  • verification_target (string, optional): What's being verified (code, config, package version, etc.)

  • is_revision (boolean, optional): Whether this revises previous thinking

  • revises_thought (integer, optional): Which thought is being reconsidered

  • branch_from_thought (integer, optional): Branching point thought number

  • branch_id (string, optional): Branch identifier

  • needs_more_thoughts (boolean, optional): If more thoughts are needed

  • current_step (object, optional): Current step recommendation with:

    • step_description: What needs to be done

    • recommended_tools: Array of tool recommendations with confidence scores

    • expected_outcome: What to expect from this step

    • next_step_conditions: Conditions for next step

  • previous_steps (array, optional): Steps already recommended

  • remaining_steps (array, optional): High-level descriptions of upcoming steps

Memory Management

The server includes built-in memory management to prevent unbounded growth:

  • History Limit: Configurable maximum number of thoughts to retain (default: 1000)

  • Automatic Trimming: History automatically trims when limit is exceeded

  • Manual Cleanup: Server provides methods to clear history when needed

Configuring History Size

You can configure the history size by setting the MAX_HISTORY_SIZE environment variable:

{
	"mcpServers": {
		"mcp-sequentialthinking-qa": {
			"command": "npx",
			"args": ["-y", "mcp-sequentialthinking-qa"],
			"env": {
				"MAX_HISTORY_SIZE": "500"
			}
		}
	}
}

Or for local development:

MAX_HISTORY_SIZE=2000 npx mcp-sequentialthinking-qa

Development

Setup

  1. Clone the repository

  2. Install dependencies:

pnpm install
  1. Build the project:

pnpm build
  1. Run in development mode:

pnpm dev

Publishing

The project uses changesets for version management. To publish:

  1. Create a changeset:

pnpm changeset
  1. Version the package:

pnpm changeset version
  1. Publish to npm:

pnpm release

Contributing

Contributions are welcome! Please feel free to submit a Pull Request.

License

MIT License - see the LICENSE file for details.

Acknowledgments

Available Tools

1 tool
sequentialthinking_qaSequential thinking for QA verification with tool recommendations.D

Sequential thinking for QA verification with tool recommendations.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
thoughtYesCurrent thinking step
branch_idNoBranch ID
is_revisionNoIs revision
current_stepNoCurrent step
previous_stepsNoPrevious steps
thought_numberYesCurrent thought number
total_thoughtsYesTotal thoughts
remaining_stepsNoRemaining steps
revises_thoughtNoRevises thought number
available_mcp_toolsYesAvailable tool names
branch_from_thoughtNoBranch from thought
needs_more_thoughtsNoNeeds more thoughts
next_thought_neededYesMore thoughts needed
verification_targetNoWhat is being verified

TDQS

D1.9/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It fails to mention any side effects, authorization needs, state changes, or output characteristics. The description is purely functional, offering no behavioral insight.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is only one sentence, which is concise but under-specified. It omits critical information, making it insufficient for a tool with 14 parameters and nested objects. Front-loading is irrelevant when so little content exists.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (14 parameters, nested structures, no output schema), the description is woefully incomplete. It does not explain the workflow, how steps relate, or what the tool returns. An agent would lack essential context to use it effectively.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so it neither enhances nor detracts from parameter understanding.

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

Purpose2/5

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

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or in what contexts. There is no mention of prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions, leaving the agent without usage direction.

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 updatev0.0.2
    • First observedsequentialthinking_qa

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or overlap between tools. The single tool has a clearly distinct purpose.

Naming Consistency5/5

The tool name 'sequentialthinking_qa' uses clear snake_case and descriptive terms. With no other tools, consistency is not an issue.

Tool Count2/5

A single tool is insufficient for a QA verification server. While focused, it lacks necessary coverage for common QA operations, making it feel thin.

Completeness2/5

The server only provides a single tool for sequential thinking, missing obvious operations like running tests, checking results, or managing test cases. This severely limits its utility for QA workflows.

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

  • F
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    MCP server that lets AI agents execute structured business processes by exposing process steps as tools with a sequenced event bus to prevent skipping steps.
    1
    -
  • F
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    An MCP server that helps AI coordinate sequential tool calls and maintain a comprehensive journal of execution workflows, decisions, and actions.
    -
  • A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    A QA verification MCP server that prevents AI hallucination by using adversarial verification with screenshots and subagents for accessibility, visual regression, and UI verification.
    592
    MIT

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/spences10/mcp-sequentialthinking-qa'

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