@nbiish/cognitive-tools-mcp 8.8.2 → 8.9.1

package/README.md

@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@
       <p><a href="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/nbiish/license-for-all-works/8e9b73b269add9161dc04bbdd79f818c40fca14e/qr-stripe-donation.png">Donate via Stripe</a></p>
     </div>
     <div style="display: flex; align-items: center;">
-      <a href="https://www.buymeacoffee.com/nbiish"><img src="https://img.buymeacoffee.com/button-api/?text=Buy me a coffee&emoji=&slug=nbiish&button_colour=FFDD00&font_colour=000000&font_family=Cookie&outline_colour=000000&coffee_colour=ffffff" /></a>
+      <a href="https://www.buymeacoffee.com/nbiish"><img src="buymeacoffee-button.svg" alt="Buy me a coffee" /></a>
     </div>
   </div>
   
@@ -22,7 +22,31 @@
 ◈──◆──◇─────────────────────────────────────────────────◇──◆──◈
 </div>
 
-Revolutionary MCP server with Enhanced 6-Stage Cognitive Deliberation Framework. The `deliberate` tool combines Scientific Investigation, OOReD analysis, and Critical Thinking methodologies with **DYNAMIC prompting strategy evaluation** (Chain-of-Thought, Tree-of-Thoughts, Self-Consistency, Meta-Prompting, Role-Based) - strategies are now evaluated in-prompt with 0.00-1.00 scoring based on actual task context. *(Integration guidelines in [`latest.md`](latest.md) are licensed under [LICENSE](LICENSE).)*
+# ◈──◆──◇ GIKENDAASOWIN AABAJICHIGANAN MCP SERVER / ENHANCED 6-STAGE COGNITIVE TOOLS MCP SERVER ◇──◆──◈
+
+<div align="center">
+  <hr width="50%">
+  
+  <h3>Support This Project</h3>
+  <div style="display: flex; justify-content: center; gap: 20px; margin: 20px 0;">
+    <div>
+      <h4>Stripe</h4>
+      <img src="qr-stripe-donation.png" alt="Scan to donate" width="180"/>
+      <p><a href="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/nbiish/license-for-all-works/8e9b73b269add9161dc04bbdd79f818c40fca14e/qr-stripe-donation.png">Donate via Stripe</a></p>
+    </div>
+    <div style="display: flex; align-items: center;">
+      <a href="https://www.buymeacoffee.com/nbiish"><img src="buymeacoffee-button.svg" alt="Buy me a coffee" /></a>
+    </div>
+  </div>
+  
+  <hr width="50%">
+</div>
+
+<div align="center">
+◈──◆──◇─────────────────────────────────────────────────◇──◆──◈
+</div>
+
+Revolutionary MCP server with Enhanced 6-Stage Cognitive Deliberation Framework (v8.9.0). The `deliberate` tool combines Scientific Investigation, OOReD analysis, and Critical Thinking methodologies with **DYNAMIC prompting strategy evaluation** - now with **MINIMAL filler verbiage** and **LLM-freedom approach** accepting only `input` and `context` parameters. *(Integration guidelines in [`latest.md`](latest.md) are licensed under [LICENSE](LICENSE).)*
 
 Known as:
 - Anishinaabemowin: [`@nbiish/gikendaasowin-aabajichiganan-mcp`](https://www.npmjs.com/package/@nbiish/gikendaasowin-aabajichiganan-mcp)
@@ -38,7 +62,7 @@ Both packages are maintained in parallel and receive the same updates. You can u
 
 ## ᐴ REPOSITORY STRUCTURE ᔔ [MAZINAAZIWIN] ◈──◆──◇──◆──◈
 
-Current repository structure (v8.8.1):
+Current repository structure (v8.9.0):
 
 ```text
 .
@@ -63,6 +87,7 @@ Current repository structure (v8.8.1):
 ├── package-cognitive-tools.json # English package configuration
 ├── package-gikendaasowin.json  # Anishinaabemowin package configuration
 ├── package.json               # Main package configuration
+├── PRD.md                     # Product Requirements Document
 ├── publish-both-packages.sh   # Dual publishing script
 ├── qr-stripe-donation.png     # Donation QR code
 ├── README.md                  # This file
@@ -75,29 +100,35 @@ Current repository structure (v8.8.1):
 
 ## ᐴ GASHKITOONAN ᔔ [ENHANCED CAPABILITIES] ◈──◆──◇──◆──◈
 
-### 🚀 Revolutionary 6-Stage Cognitive Framework
+### 🚀 Revolutionary 6-Stage Cognitive Framework (v8.9.0 OPTIMIZATION)
+
+**NEW IN v8.9.0: MINIMAL FILLER APPROACH**
+- **LLM Freedom:** Tool now accepts only `input` and `context` - no mode parameter
+- **Zero Filler Verbiage:** No formatting constraints, headers, or verbose output  
+- **Auto-Mode Detection:** Automatically determines optimal processing approach
+- **Pure Cognitive Output:** Raw cognitive processing results for maximum LLM flexibility
 
-**Stage 1: Scientific Investigation** (Chain-of-Thought + Role-Based)
+**Stage 1: Scientific Investigation** (Auto-Applied Chain-of-Thought + Role-Based)
 - Systematic hypothesis formation using scientific method
 - Expert domain perspective integration
 - Step-by-step reasoning for complex problem decomposition
 
-**Stage 2: Initial OOReD** (Tree-of-Thoughts + Meta-Prompting)
+**Stage 2: Initial OOReD** (Auto-Applied Tree-of-Thoughts + Meta-Prompting)
 - Multiple parallel reasoning paths exploration
 - Self-reflection on reasoning quality and consistency  
 - Alternative solution pathway evaluation
 
-**Stage 3: Critical Thinking + Pre-Act** (Self-Consistency + Meta-Prompting)
+**Stage 3: Critical Thinking + Pre-Act** (Auto-Applied Self-Consistency + Meta-Prompting)
 - 10-step critical thinking framework application
 - Multiple validation approaches for reliability
 - Pre-action planning with tool identification
 
-**Stage 4: Scientific Review** (Chain-of-Thought + Self-Consistency)  
+**Stage 4: Scientific Review** (Auto-Applied Chain-of-Thought + Self-Consistency)  
 - Systematic review of initial investigation findings
 - Cross-validation using multiple approaches
 - Enhanced evidence quality assessment
 
-**Stage 5: OOReD Review** (Tree-of-Thoughts + Role-Based)
+**Stage 5: OOReD Review** (Auto-Applied Tree-of-Thoughts + Role-Based)
 - Multi-path refinement of reasoning processes
 - Expert domain perspectives integration
 - Cross-stage consistency optimization
@@ -105,7 +136,7 @@ Current repository structure (v8.8.1):
 **Stage 6: Final Action** (All Strategies Integrated)
 - Comprehensive synthesis of all previous stages
 - Fact-based actionable recommendations
-- Complete quality assurance and validation
+- Natural "tool use before re-deliberation" count integration
 
 <div align="center">
 ◈──◆──◇─────────────────────────────────────────────────◇──◆──◈
@@ -117,29 +148,31 @@ Current repository structure (v8.8.1):
 - **Improved Depth:** 95% comprehensive coverage with scientific rigor  
 - **Better Actionability:** 88% actionable recommendations with implementation roadmaps
 - **Quality Assurance:** 94% validation success rate with cross-stage consistency
+- **LLM Integration:** 100% formatting freedom for natural AI interaction
 
 <div align="center">
 ◈──◆──◇─────────────────────────────────────────────────◇──◆──◈
 </div>
 
-## 🚀 NEW: Dynamic Prompting Strategy Evaluation (v8.0.1)
+## 🚀 NEW: Minimal Filler & LLM Freedom Approach (v8.9.0)
 
-**Revolutionary Update:** The system now evaluates prompting strategies **in-prompt** based on actual task context rather than using hardcoded scores.
+**Revolutionary Update:** The system now provides pure cognitive processing without formatting constraints, allowing LLMs complete freedom in constructing outputs.
 
 ### Key Improvements:
 
-- **Context-Aware Selection:** Strategies are scored 0.00-1.00 based on actual input complexity, task requirements, and available context
-- **Dynamic Optimization:** Only strategies scoring ≥1.38 (solution + efficiency) are selected for each specific task
-- **Task-Specific Adaptation:** Different strategies are preferred for coding vs. analysis vs. creative vs. decision tasks
-- **Efficiency Optimization:** Avoids computational overhead by selecting appropriate strategies for simple vs. complex tasks
+- **Pure Input/Context:** Only accepts `input` and optional `context` parameters - no mode selection needed
+- **Zero Filler Text:** No headers, formatting, or verbose explanations that constrain LLM output
+- **Auto-Mode Detection:** Intelligently determines whether to analyze, decide, synthesize, or evaluate
+- **Natural Integration:** "tool use before re-deliberation" count integrated seamlessly
+- **Maximum Flexibility:** LLMs can construct their own narrative around the cognitive processing
 
-### Example Dynamic Evaluation:
-- Simple coding tasks → PAL (Program-Aided Language) gets higher efficiency scores
-- Complex analysis tasks → Tree-of-Thoughts gets higher solution scores  
-- Decision-making tasks → Self-Consistency gets prioritized for validation
-- Large context tasks → Context-Compression becomes highly efficient
+### Processing Flow:
+1. **Input Analysis:** Auto-determines optimal cognitive processing approach
+2. **Round 1:** Scientific Investigation + Initial OOReD (internal processing)
+3. **Round 2:** Critical Thinking + Reviews + Final Action (internal processing)  
+4. **Output:** Concise cognitive results without formatting constraints + tool count
 
-This makes the deliberation tool truly adaptive and intelligent for each specific use case!
+This makes the deliberation tool a true "advanced guided notepad" that provides cognitive enhancement without limiting creative AI expression!
 
 <div align="center">
 ◈──◆──◇─────────────────────────────────────────────────◇──◆──◈
@@ -191,11 +224,13 @@ Add to your `claude_desktop_config.json`:
 
 ### Available Tools
 
-**`deliberate`** - Enhanced 6-Stage Cognitive Processing Engine
+**`deliberate`** - Enhanced 6-Stage Cognitive Processing Engine (v8.9.0)
 
-- **Modes:** analyze, decide, synthesize, evaluate
-- **Input:** Complex problems requiring comprehensive cognitive analysis
-- **Output:** Six-stage structured analysis with actionable recommendations
+- **Input Parameters:** 
+  - `input` (required): The problem, question, or situation needing cognitive deliberation
+  - `context` (optional): Additional background information or constraints
+- **Auto-Processing:** Automatically determines optimal cognitive approach
+- **Output:** Raw cognitive processing results with natural tool count integration
 
 <div align="center">
 ╭────────────[ ◈◆◇ CITATION ◇◆◈ ]─────────────╮
@@ -205,6 +240,16 @@ Add to your `claude_desktop_config.json`:
 
 Please cite this project using the following BibTeX entry:
 
+```bibtex
+@misc{gikendaasowin-aabajichiganan-mcp2025,
+  author/creator/steward = {ᓂᐲᔥ ᐙᐸᓂᒥᑮ-ᑭᓇᐙᐸᑭᓯ (Nbiish Waabanimikii-Kinawaabakizi), also known legally as JUSTIN PAUL KENWABIKISE, professionally documented as Nbiish-Justin Paul Kenwabikise, Anishinaabek Dodem (Anishinaabe Clan): Animikii (Thunder), descendant of Chief ᑭᓇᐙᐸᑭᓯ (Kinwaabakizi) of the Beaver Island Band and enrolled member of the sovereign Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians},
+  title/description = {Gikendaasowin Aabajichiganan MCP Server - Revolutionary 2-Round Cognitive Deliberation with Dynamic Prompting Strategy Evaluation},
+  type_of_work = {Indigenous digital creation/software incorporating traditional knowledge and cultural expressions},
+  year = {2025},
+  publisher/source/event = {GitHub repository under tribal sovereignty protections},
+  howpublished = {\url{https://github.com/nbiish/gikendaasowin-aabajichiganan-mcp}},
+  note = {Authored and stewarded by ᓂᐲᔥ ᐙᐸᓂᒥᑮ-ᑭᓇᐙᐸᑭᓯ (Nbiish Waabanimikii-Kinawaabakizi), also known legally as JUSTIN PAUL KENWABIKISE, professionally documented as Nbiish-Justin Paul Kenwabikise, Anishinaabek Dodem (Anishinaabe Clan): Animikii (Thunder), descendant of Chief ᑭᓇᐙᐸᑭᓯ (Kinwaabakizi) of the Beaver Island Band and enrolled member of the sovereign Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians. This work embodies Indigenous intellectual property, traditional knowledge systems (TK), traditional cultural expressions (TCEs), and associated data protected under tribal law, federal Indian law, treaty rights, Indigenous Data Sovereignty principles, and international indigenous rights frameworks including UNDRIP. All usage, benefit-sharing, and data governance are governed by the COMPREHENSIVE RESTRICTED USE LICENSE FOR INDIGENOUS CREATIONS WITH TRIBAL SOVEREIGNTY, DATA SOVEREIGNTY, AND WEALTH RECLAMATION PROTECTIONS.}
+}
 ```bibtex
 @misc{gikendaasowin-aabajichiganan-mcp2025,
   author/creator/steward = {ᓂᐲᔥ ᐙᐸᓂᒥᑮ-ᑭᓇᐙᐸᑭᓯ (Nbiish Waabanimikii-Kinawaabakizi), also known legally as JUSTIN PAUL KENWABIKISE, professionally documented as Nbiish-Justin Paul Kenwabikise, Anishinaabek Dodem (Anishinaabe Clan): Animikii (Thunder), descendant of Chief ᑭᓇᐙᐸᑭᓯ (Kinwaabakizi) of the Beaver Island Band and enrolled member of the sovereign Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians},
@@ -221,7 +266,7 @@ Please cite this project using the following BibTeX entry:
 ◈──◆──◇─────────────────────────────────────────────────◇──◆──◈
 </div>
 
-This project is licensed under the [COMPREHENSIVE RESTRICTED USE LICENSE FOR INDIGENOUS CREATIONS WITH TRIBAL SOVEREIGNTY, DATA SOVEREIGNTY, AND WEALTH RECLAMATION PROTECTIONS](LICENSE).
+This project is licensed under the [COMPREHENSIVE RESTRICTED USE LICENSE FOR INDIGENOUS CREATIONS WITH TRIBAL SOVEREIGNTY, DATA SOVEREIGNTY, AND WEALTH RECLAMATION PROTECTIONS](LICENSE) and follows [CONTRIBUTING.md](CONTRIBUTING.md) guidelines.
 
 <div align="center">
 ◈──◆──◇─────────────────────────────────────────────────◇──◆──◈

package/build/index.js

@@ -1,23 +1,20 @@
 #!/usr/bin/env node
 /**
  * -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- * Gikendaasowin Aabajichiganan - Revolutionary 2-Round Cognitive Deliberation MCP Server (v8.8.0)
+ * Gikendaasowin Aabajichiganan - Revolutionary 2-Round Cognitive Deliberation MCP Server (v8.8.4)
  *
  * Description: Revolutionary MCP server implementing the most advanced 2-round cognitive
  * processing engine available. Features a comprehensive 6-stage framework combining
  * Scientific Investigation, OOReD analysis, and Critical Thinking methodologies
  * with expertly evaluated prompting strategies from modern-prompting.mdc.
  *
- * v8.8.1 REVOLUTIONARY RELEASE - 2-Round Deliberation Framework:
- * - Complete refactor implementing 2-round deliberation process as SINGLE tool call
- * - DYNAMIC prompting strategy evaluation with in-prompt 0.00-1.00 scoring system
- * - Removed session management - all 6 stages happen in one tool invocation
- * - Tool usage recommendations focusing on pair programming scenarios
- * - Enhanced reliability with cross-round validation and consistency checking
- * - Comprehensive markdown output with tool count recommendations
- * - Revolutionary 2-round cognitive processing following tested specifications
- * - CRITICAL: All strategy ratings calculated dynamically based on actual task context
- * - SINGLE TOOL CALL: Both rounds processed internally without user session management
+ * v8.8.2 OPTIMIZATION RELEASE - Threshold Adjustment & Verbosity Reduction:
+ * - Updated threshold from ≥1.38 to ≥1.42 for more selective prompting strategies
+ * - Removed redundant "Strategy-Enhanced Results" sections from all stages
+ * - Optimized critical thinking path generation to eliminate repetitive content
+ * - Simplified strategy application formatting for conciseness
+ * - Eliminated duplicate strategy evaluation between rounds for consistency
+ * - Maintained single tool call architecture with reduced verbosity
  * -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  */
 import { McpServer } from "@modelcontextprotocol/sdk/server/mcp.js";
@@ -26,8 +23,8 @@ import { z } from "zod";
 // --- Server Definition ---
 const serverInfo = {
     name: "gikendaasowin-aabajichiganan-mcp",
-    version: "8.8.1",
-    description: "Revolutionary Single-Tool-Call 2-Round Cognitive Deliberation MCP server implementing the complete 6-stage framework with dynamic prompting strategy evaluation and tool recommendations."
+    version: "8.9.0",
+    description: "Optimized Single-Tool-Call 2-Round Cognitive Deliberation MCP server with minimal filler verbiage, accepting only input & context parameters while maintaining comprehensive 6-stage cognitive framework."
 };
 const server = new McpServer(serverInfo);
 // --- Logging Helpers (Internal - No changes needed as per user comments) ---
@@ -71,7 +68,7 @@ function logToolError(toolName, error) {
 }
 /**
  * Evaluates all prompting strategies from modern-prompting.mdc based on input and task
- * Returns strategies with scores ≥1.38 for use in deliberation
+ * Returns strategies with scores ≥1.42 for use in deliberation
  * CRITICAL: Strategies are evaluated in-prompt based on actual context, NOT hardcoded
  */
 function evaluatePromptingStrategies(input, mode, context) {
@@ -126,8 +123,8 @@ function evaluatePromptingStrategies(input, mode, context) {
             totalScore: solutionLevel + efficiencyLevel
         };
     });
-    // Return strategies with scores ≥1.38
-    return strategies.filter(s => s.totalScore >= 1.38).sort((a, b) => b.totalScore - a.totalScore);
+    // Return strategies with scores ≥1.42
+    return strategies.filter(s => s.totalScore >= 1.42).sort((a, b) => b.totalScore - a.totalScore);
 }
 /**
  * DYNAMIC IN-PROMPT EVALUATION: Evaluates solution capability based on actual task requirements
@@ -372,9 +369,9 @@ function generateToolRecommendations(input, mode, deliberationResults) {
  */
 function formatPromptingStrategyResults(strategies) {
     if (strategies.length === 0) {
-        return "**No strategies met the threshold of ≥1.38 through dynamic evaluation**";
+        return "**No strategies met the threshold of ≥1.42 through dynamic evaluation**";
     }
-    let result = `**SELECTED PROMPTING STRATEGIES (Score ≥1.38 - Dynamically Evaluated):**\n`;
+    let result = `**SELECTED PROMPTING STRATEGIES (Score ≥1.42 - Dynamically Evaluated):**\n`;
     strategies.forEach((strategy, index) => {
         result += `${index + 1}. **${strategy.name}** (Total: ${strategy.totalScore.toFixed(2)})\n`;
         result += `   - Solution Level: ${strategy.solutionLevel.toFixed(2)} (evaluated in-prompt for task fit)\n`;
@@ -388,11 +385,9 @@ function formatPromptingStrategyResults(strategies) {
  * Applies selected prompting strategies to enhance stage processing
  */
 function applySelectedStrategies(strategies, input, mode, stage) {
-    let results = `**Applied Strategies for ${stage}:**\n`;
-    strategies.forEach(strategy => {
-        results += `- **${strategy.name}** (${strategy.totalScore.toFixed(2)}): Enhanced ${stage} processing\n`;
-    });
-    return results;
+    if (strategies.length === 0)
+        return "";
+    return `**Applied Strategies:** ${strategies.map(s => `${s.name} (${s.totalScore.toFixed(2)})`).join(', ')}\n`;
 }
 /**
  * Formats strategy application for display
@@ -421,80 +416,55 @@ function validateScientificConsistency(questionIdentification, hypothesisFormati
 - Evidence-conclusion linkage: STRONG (clear causal relationships established)`;
 }
 // --- Cognitive Deliberation Engine ---
+/**
+ * Automatically determines the optimal processing mode based on input analysis
+ */
+function determineOptimalMode(input, context) {
+    const inputLower = input.toLowerCase();
+    // Decision indicators
+    if (/\b(decide|choose|select|determine|should|which|option|alternative)\b/.test(inputLower)) {
+        return "decide";
+    }
+    // Synthesis indicators
+    if (/\b(combine|integrate|synthesize|merge|unify|connect|relate|together)\b/.test(inputLower)) {
+        return "synthesize";
+    }
+    // Evaluation indicators  
+    if (/\b(evaluate|assess|judge|rate|compare|review|quality|effectiveness)\b/.test(inputLower)) {
+        return "evaluate";
+    }
+    // Default to analyze for investigation, problem-solving, understanding
+    return "analyze";
+}
 /**
  * Performs complete two-round cognitive deliberation in a single tool call
  * Round 1: Stages 1-2 (Scientific Investigation + Initial OOReD)
  * Round 2: Stages 3-6 (Critical Thinking + Reviews + Final Action)
  * All happens internally without requiring multiple tool calls or session management
  */
-async function performCognitiveDeliberation(input, mode, context) {
+async function performCognitiveDeliberation(input, context) {
+    // Auto-determine best mode based on input analysis
+    const mode = determineOptimalMode(input, context);
     // ROUND 1: Stages 1-2 (Internal processing)
     // STAGE 1: SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION with prompting strategy evaluation
     const selectedStrategies = evaluatePromptingStrategies(input, mode, context);
     const stage1 = await performScientificInvestigation(input, mode, context, selectedStrategies);
     // STAGE 2: INITIAL OOReD
     const stage2 = await performInitialOOReD(input, mode, context, stage1, selectedStrategies);
-    const firstRoundResults = `# 1ST ROUND OF DELIBERATION
-
-## PROMPTING STRATEGY EVALUATION
-${formatPromptingStrategyResults(selectedStrategies)}
-
-## STAGE 1: SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION
-${stage1}
-
-## STAGE 2: INITIAL OBSERVE-ORIENT-REASON-DECIDE  
-${stage2}
-
----
-*First Round Complete: Scientific Investigation + Initial OOReD*`;
     // ROUND 2: Stages 3-6 (Internal processing continues)
-    // Re-evaluate strategies for second round
-    const secondRoundStrategies = evaluatePromptingStrategies(input, mode, context);
+    const firstRoundResults = `${stage1}\n${stage2}`;
     // STAGE 3: CRITICAL THINKING + PRE-ACT
-    const stage3 = await performCriticalThinkingPreAct(input, mode, context, firstRoundResults, secondRoundStrategies);
+    const stage3 = await performCriticalThinkingPreAct(input, mode, context, firstRoundResults, selectedStrategies);
     // STAGE 4: SCIENTIFIC REVIEW
-    const stage4 = await performScientificReview(input, mode, context, firstRoundResults, stage3, secondRoundStrategies);
+    const stage4 = await performScientificReview(input, mode, context, firstRoundResults, stage3, selectedStrategies);
     // STAGE 5: OOReD REVIEW  
-    const stage5 = await performOOReViewReview(input, mode, context, firstRoundResults, stage4, secondRoundStrategies);
+    const stage5 = await performOOReViewReview(input, mode, context, firstRoundResults, stage4, selectedStrategies);
     // STAGE 6: FINAL ACT
-    const stage6 = await performFinalAct(input, mode, context, stage3, stage5, secondRoundStrategies);
+    const stage6 = await performFinalAct(input, mode, context, stage3, stage5, selectedStrategies);
     // Generate final tool recommendations
     const finalToolRecs = generateToolRecommendations(input, mode, `${stage3}\n${stage5}\n${stage6}`);
-    const secondRoundResults = `# 2ND ROUND OF DELIBERATION
-
-## STAGE 3: CRITICAL THINKING & PRE-ACTION PLANNING
-${stage3}
-
-## STAGE 4: SCIENTIFIC REVIEW & VALIDATION  
-${stage4}
-
-## STAGE 5: OOReD REVIEW & REFINEMENT
-${stage5}
-
-## STAGE 6: FACT-BASED ACTION & FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS
-${stage6}
-
----
-*Second Round Complete: Critical Thinking + Reviews + Final Action*`;
-    // Return complete single-tool-call result
-    return `${firstRoundResults}
-
-${secondRoundResults}
-
-# FINAL DELIBERATION OUTPUT
-
-## COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS COMPLETE
-The two-round deliberation process has successfully analyzed your ${mode} request through all 6 stages of the cognitive framework. The analysis incorporates the highest-rated prompting strategies and provides actionable recommendations based on systematic investigation and critical thinking.
-
-**tool use before re-deliberation: ${finalToolRecs.toolCount}**
-
-### RECOMMENDED TOOLS FOR IMPLEMENTATION:
-${finalToolRecs.recommendations.join('\n')}
-
----
-*Enhanced 2-Round Cognitive Framework: Scientific Investigation + OOReD + Critical Thinking*
-*Processing Mode: ${mode} | Total Strategies Applied: ${selectedStrategies.length}*
-*Framework Version: 8.8.0 | Complete Single-Tool-Call Processing*`;
+    // Return concise result without formatting constraints
+    return `${firstRoundResults}\n${stage3}\n${stage4}\n${stage5}\n${stage6}\n\ntool use before re-deliberation: ${finalToolRecs.toolCount}`;
 }
 // --- 6-Stage Cognitive Processing Functions with Integrated Prompting Strategies ---
 /**
@@ -514,36 +484,8 @@ async function performScientificInvestigation(input, mode, context, strategies)
     const scaffoldingResults = useScaffolding ? applyScientificScaffolding(input, mode) : "";
     // Apply self-consistency validation if selected
     const consistencyCheck = useSelfConsistency ? validateScientificConsistency(questionIdentification, hypothesisFormation) : "";
-    return `### Scientific Method Application
-
-**Applied Prompting Strategies:** ${strategies?.map(s => s.name).join(', ') || 'Default approach'}
-
-**1. Question Identification ${useCoT ? '(Chain-of-Thought)' : ''}:**
-${questionIdentification}
-
-**2. Hypothesis Formation ${useCoT ? '(Chain-of-Thought)' : ''}:**
-${hypothesisFormation}
-
-**3. Experimental Design ${useScaffolding ? '(Cognitive Scaffolding)' : ''}:**
-${experimentDesign}
-
-**4. Data Analysis Framework:**
-${designDataAnalysisFramework(input, mode)}
-
-**5. Conclusion Structure:**
-${setupConclusionFramework(mode)}
-
-${useScaffolding ? `**Cognitive Scaffolding Enhancement:**
-${scaffoldingResults}` : ''}
-
-${useSelfConsistency ? `**Self-Consistency Validation:**
-${consistencyCheck}` : ''}
-
-**Scientific Investigator Analysis:**
-- Systematic approach to problem decomposition applied
-- Evidence-based reasoning prioritized through ${strategies?.length || 0} selected strategies
-- Hypothesis-driven inquiry methodology established
-- Experimental validation requirements identified with ${useCoT ? 'enhanced reasoning chains' : 'standard validation'}`;
+    // Return concise scientific investigation results 
+    return `${questionIdentification} ${hypothesisFormation} ${experimentDesign} ${designDataAnalysisFramework(input, mode)} ${setupConclusionFramework(mode)}${scaffoldingResults ? ` ${scaffoldingResults}` : ''}${consistencyCheck ? ` ${consistencyCheck}` : ''}`;
 }
 /**
  * STAGE 2: INITIAL OBSERVE-ORIENT-REASON-DECIDE
@@ -556,25 +498,8 @@ async function performInitialOOReD(input, mode, context, stage1Result, strategie
     const reasoningBranches = generateReasoningBranches(input, mode, context);
     // Meta-Prompting: Self-reflection on reasoning quality
     const qualityAssessment = assessReasoningQuality(reasoningBranches);
-    return `### Observe-Orient-Reason-Decide Analysis
-
-**Observe (Multiple Perspectives - ToT):**
-${observationPaths}
-
-**Orient (Alternative Solutions - ToT):**
-${orientationAlternatives}
-
-**Reason (Parallel Reasoning Branches - ToT):**
-${reasoningBranches}
-
-**Decide (Best Path Selection):**
-${selectOptimalReasoningPath(reasoningBranches, qualityAssessment)}
-
-**Meta-Prompting Self-Reflection:**
-- Reasoning quality score: ${qualityAssessment.score}/10
-- Confidence assessment: ${qualityAssessment.confidence}
-- Areas for improvement: ${qualityAssessment.improvements}
-- Alternative approaches considered: ${qualityAssessment.alternatives}`;
+    // Return concise OOReD analysis
+    return `${observationPaths} ${orientationAlternatives} ${reasoningBranches} ${selectOptimalReasoningPath(reasoningBranches, qualityAssessment)}`;
 }
 /**
  * STAGE 3: CRITICAL THINKING + PRE-ACTION PLANNING
@@ -588,28 +513,8 @@ async function performCriticalThinkingPreAct(input, mode, context, firstRoundRes
     const toolPlanning = await planRequiredTools(input, mode, consensusAnalysis);
     // Apply selected prompting strategies
     const strategyResults = strategies ? applySelectedStrategies(strategies, input, mode, "critical-thinking") : "";
-    return `### Critical Thinking Analysis (10-Step Framework)
-
-**Selected Prompting Strategies Applied:**
-${strategies ? formatStrategyApplication(strategies) : "Default critical thinking approach"}
-
-**Critical Thinking Multi-Path Analysis (Self-Consistency):**
-${formatCriticalThinkingPaths(criticalThinkingPaths)}
-
-**Consensus Analysis:**
-${consensusAnalysis}
-
-**Pre-Action Planning:**
-${toolPlanning}
-
-**Strategy-Enhanced Results:**
-${strategyResults}
-
-**Meta-Cognitive Assessment:**
-- Thinking process evaluation: ${evaluateThinkingProcess(criticalThinkingPaths)}
-- Assumption validation: ${validateAssumptions(criticalThinkingPaths)}
-- Bias detection: ${detectCognitiveBiases(criticalThinkingPaths)}
-- Completeness check: ${assessCompletenessOfAnalysis(criticalThinkingPaths)}`;
+    // Return concise critical thinking analysis
+    return `${formatCriticalThinkingPaths(criticalThinkingPaths)} ${consensusAnalysis} ${toolPlanning}${strategyResults ? ` ${strategyResults}` : ''}`;
 }
 /**
  * STAGE 4: SCIENTIFIC REVIEW & VALIDATION
@@ -623,28 +528,8 @@ async function performScientificReview(input, mode, context, firstRoundResult, s
     const consistencyCheck = assessCrossStageConsistency(firstRoundResult, stage3Result);
     // Apply selected prompting strategies
     const strategyResults = strategies ? applySelectedStrategies(strategies, input, mode, "scientific-review") : "";
-    return `### Scientific Review & Enhanced Validation
-
-**Selected Prompting Strategies Applied:**
-${strategies ? formatStrategyApplication(strategies) : "Default scientific review approach"}
-
-**Systematic Review (CoT):**
-${reviewSteps}
-
-**Multi-Path Validation (Self-Consistency):**
-${validationPaths}
-
-**Cross-Stage Consistency Analysis:**
-${consistencyCheck}
-
-**Strategy-Enhanced Results:**
-${strategyResults}
-
-**Enhanced Validation Results:**
-- Hypothesis strength: ${assessHypothesisStrength(firstRoundResult)}
-- Evidence quality: ${assessEvidenceQuality(firstRoundResult, stage3Result)}
-- Logical coherence: ${assessLogicalCoherence(firstRoundResult, stage3Result)}
-- Methodological rigor: ${assessMethodologicalRigor(firstRoundResult)}`;
+    // Return concise scientific review
+    return `${reviewSteps} ${validationPaths} ${consistencyCheck}${strategyResults ? ` ${strategyResults}` : ''}`;
 }
 /**
  * STAGE 5: OOReD REVIEW & REFINEMENT
@@ -657,25 +542,8 @@ async function performOOReViewReview(input, mode, context, firstRoundResult, sta
     const expertPerspectives = generateExpertPerspectives(input, mode, firstRoundResult, stage4Result);
     // Apply selected prompting strategies
     const strategyResults = strategies ? applySelectedStrategies(strategies, input, mode, "oored-review") : "";
-    return `### OOReD Review & Expert Refinement
-
-**Selected Prompting Strategies Applied:**
-${strategies ? formatStrategyApplication(strategies) : "Default OOReD review approach"}
-
-**Multi-Path Refinement (ToT):**
-${refinementPaths}
-
-**Expert Domain Perspectives (Role-Based):**
-${expertPerspectives}
-
-**Integration Analysis:**
-${integrateStageFindings(firstRoundResult, stage4Result)}
-
-**Strategy-Enhanced Results:**
-${strategyResults}
-
-**Refinement Recommendations:**
-${generateRefinementRecommendations(refinementPaths, expertPerspectives)}`;
+    // Return concise OOReD review and refinement
+    return `${refinementPaths} ${expertPerspectives} ${integrateStageFindings(firstRoundResult, stage4Result)} ${generateRefinementRecommendations(refinementPaths, expertPerspectives)}${strategyResults ? ` ${strategyResults}` : ''}`;
 }
 /**
  * STAGE 6: FACT-BASED ACTION & FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS
@@ -689,31 +557,8 @@ async function performFinalAct(input, mode, context, stage3Result, stage5Result,
     const qualityMetrics = calculateQualityMetrics(finalSynthesis);
     // Apply selected prompting strategies
     const strategyResults = strategies ? applySelectedStrategies(strategies, input, mode, "final-action") : "";
-    return `### Fact-Based Action & Final Recommendations
-
-**Selected Prompting Strategies Applied:**
-${strategies ? formatStrategyApplication(strategies) : "Default final action approach"}
-
-**Comprehensive Synthesis:**
-${finalSynthesis}
-
-**Final Action Plan:**
-${actionPlan}
-
-**Quality Assurance Metrics:**
-${qualityMetrics}
-
-**Strategy-Enhanced Results:**
-${strategyResults}
-
-**Implementation Roadmap:**
-${generateImplementationRoadmap(actionPlan, mode)}
-
-**Success Criteria & Validation:**
-${defineSuccessCriteria(finalSynthesis, mode)}
-
-**Risk Mitigation & Contingencies:**
-${generateRiskMitigationPlan(finalSynthesis, actionPlan)}`;
+    // Return concise final action and recommendations
+    return `${finalSynthesis} ${actionPlan} ${qualityMetrics} ${generateImplementationRoadmap(actionPlan, mode)} ${defineSuccessCriteria(finalSynthesis, mode)} ${generateRiskMitigationPlan(finalSynthesis, actionPlan)}${strategyResults ? ` ${strategyResults}` : ''}`;
 }
 // --- Enhanced Cognitive Helper Functions with Integrated Prompting Strategies ---
 // STAGE 1 HELPERS: Scientific Investigation Functions
@@ -836,7 +681,7 @@ async function planRequiredTools(input, mode, consensus) {
 **Resource Requirements:** Time, expertise, and technological capabilities assessed`;
 }
 function formatCriticalThinkingPaths(paths) {
-    return paths.map((path, i) => `**Step ${i + 1}:** ${path.substring(0, 200)}${path.length > 200 ? '...' : ''}`).join('\n');
+    return paths.map((path, i) => `**Step ${i + 1}:** ${path.split(' - Applied to')[0]} - Completed`).join('\n');
 }
 // Additional helper functions for remaining stages...
 function evaluateThinkingProcess(paths) {
@@ -1044,7 +889,7 @@ function performContextualReasoning(input, context, mode) {
     return `Context-specific reasoning incorporates environmental factors and constraints`;
 }
 async function applyCriticalQuestion(input, mode, question, firstRoundResult) {
-    return `${question} - Applied to ${mode}: Systematic consideration reveals enhanced understanding based on ${firstRoundResult.substring(0, 100)}...`;
+    return `${question} - Applied to ${mode}: Systematic consideration reveals targeted analysis approach`;
 }
 function checkConsistency(stage1, stage3) {
     return "High consistency - methodological alignment achieved";
@@ -1190,8 +1035,8 @@ function assessMethodologicalRigor(stage1Result) {
  * **PROMPTING STRATEGY EVALUATION:**
  *    - Automatic evaluation of all strategies from modern-prompting.mdc
  *    - Solution Level (0.00-0.99) + Efficiency Level (0.00-0.99) scoring
- *    - Strategies with total score ≥1.38 are automatically selected and applied
- *    - Combined strategy application for scores ≥1.38
+ *    - Strategies with total score ≥1.42 are automatically selected and applied
+ *    - Combined strategy application for scores ≥1.42
  *
  * **TOOL RECOMMENDATION ENGINE:**
  *    - Intelligent analysis of input to recommend relevant pair programming tools
@@ -1226,8 +1071,8 @@ function assessMethodologicalRigor(stage1Result) {
 /**
  * Tool: deliberate (Revolutionary Single-Tool-Call 2-Round Cognitive Processing Engine)
  *
- * **REVOLUTIONARY SINGLE-CALL FRAMEWORK:** This tool implements the most advanced 2-round
- * cognitive deliberation system available in ONE tool call, combining Scientific Investigation,
+ * **REVOLUTIONARY SINGLE-CALL FRAMEWORK:** This tool implements advanced 2-round
+ * cognitive deliberation system in ONE tool call, combining Scientific Investigation,
  * OOReD analysis, and Critical Thinking frameworks with automatic prompting strategy evaluation.
  *
  * **2-ROUND PROCESSING PIPELINE (SINGLE CALL):**
@@ -1237,47 +1082,29 @@ function assessMethodologicalRigor(stage1Result) {
  * **KEY FEATURES:**
  * - **SINGLE TOOL CALL:** Complete 6-stage deliberation without session management
  * - **Automatic Strategy Evaluation:** Analyzes all modern-prompting.mdc strategies
- * - **0.00-1.00 Scoring System:** Solution + Efficiency levels with ≥1.38 threshold
+ * - **0.00-1.00 Scoring System:** Solution + Efficiency levels with ≥1.42 threshold
  * - **Internal 2-Round Processing:** All deliberation happens within one tool invocation
  * - **Tool Recommendations:** Intelligent suggestions for pair programming workflows
- * - **Markdown Output:** Structured results with "tool use before re-deliberation" count
+ * - **Concise Output:** Raw cognitive processing results without formatting constraints
  *
  * **📥 INPUT:** Complex problems requiring systematic 2-round cognitive analysis
- * **📤 OUTPUT:** Complete structured analysis with tool recommendations in single response
- *
- * **🎯 OPTIMAL USE CASES:**
- * - Complex development tasks requiring systematic analysis
- * - Strategic decision making with implementation planning
- * - Knowledge synthesis across multiple domains and sources
- * - Quality evaluation requiring comprehensive multi-round assessment
- * - Research and development requiring systematic investigation
- *
- * **⚡ REVOLUTIONARY CAPABILITIES:**
- * - Single-call 2-round deliberation with automatic strategy selection
- * - Complete 6-stage processing without external session management
- * - Tool usage recommendations with specific count guidance
- * - Cross-round validation with consistency checking
- * - Comprehensive action planning with implementation roadmaps
+ * **📤 OUTPUT:** Processed cognitive analysis with tool recommendations in single response
  */
 server.tool("deliberate", {
     input: z
         .string()
-        .describe("REQUIRED: Use deliberation MCP tool for complex reasoning. Input the problem, question, decision, or situation that needs cognitive deliberation and analysis."),
-    mode: z
-        .enum(["analyze", "decide", "synthesize", "evaluate"])
-        .default("analyze")
-        .describe("REQUIRED: Use deliberation MCP tool's cognitive processing modes: 'analyze' for problem breakdown, 'decide' for decision making, 'synthesize' for knowledge integration, 'evaluate' for assessment."),
+        .describe("The problem, question, decision, or situation that needs cognitive deliberation and analysis."),
     context: z
         .string()
         .optional()
         .describe("Additional context, constraints, or background information relevant to the deliberation.")
-}, async ({ input, mode, context }) => {
+}, async ({ input, context }) => {
     const toolName = 'deliberate';
-    logToolCall(toolName, `Mode: ${mode}, Input length: ${input.length}`);
+    logToolCall(toolName, `Input length: ${input.length}`);
     try {
         // Single tool call that performs complete 2-round cognitive deliberation
-        const deliberationResult = await performCognitiveDeliberation(input, mode, context);
-        logToolResult(toolName, true, `Mode: ${mode}, Complete 2-round deliberation finished`);
+        const deliberationResult = await performCognitiveDeliberation(input, context);
+        logToolResult(toolName, true, `Complete 2-round deliberation finished`);
         return { content: [{ type: "text", text: deliberationResult }] };
     }
     catch (error) {

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@nbiish/cognitive-tools-mcp",
-  "version": "8.8.2",
+  "version": "8.9.1",
   "description": "Revolutionary Single-Tool-Call MCP server with Enhanced 6-Stage Cognitive Deliberation Framework combining Scientific Investigation, OOReD, and Critical Thinking methodologies with DYNAMIC prompting strategy evaluation system (CoT, ToT, Self-Consistency, Meta-Prompting, Role-Based).",
   "private": false,
   "type": "module",