A
licenseA
qualityA
maintenanceProvides read-only tools to generate test plans for AI agents, score agent runs, and produce reusable evaluation scorecards.
3
MIT
Sophon Consulting
Server Details
Read-only, deterministic AI triage and readiness tools implementing Sophon's published rubrics.
If you are the author of this connector, you can claim ownership with GitHub, an HTTP challenge, or a DNS record. Claimed connector authors can inspect health checks, view analytics, and manage their listing.
- Status
- Healthy
- Uptime
- 100.0% over 37 days
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP · MCP 2025-11-25
- URL
TDQS
A4.7/5.0
Scored across 2 tools
Disambiguation5/5
Both tools have clearly distinct purposes: one for organization-wide AI readiness assessment, the other for evaluating a single AI opportunity. Each description explicitly states what it is not for, eliminating ambiguity.
Naming Consistency5/5
Both tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: 'assess_ai_readiness' and 'triage_ai_opportunity', making them predictable and easy to distinguish.
Tool Count5/5
With only 2 tools, the server is sharply focused on two key consulting activities—organizational readiness and individual opportunity assessment. This is an appropriate scope for the domain.
Completeness4/5
The tools cover the initial assessment and triage phases well, but there is a minor gap: no tool for follow-up actions or detailed implementation planning, which might be needed after the verdict.
Available Tools
2 toolsassess_ai_readinessAssess AI readinessARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Assess an organization's readiness to run AI in production across five dimensions (data readiness, workflow ownership, governance and controls, delivery capacity, executive sponsorship), each scored 1-5 with evidence or marked unknown, plus classified candidate use cases. Returns a deterministic verdict — Ready, Ready with conditions, Not yet ready, or Insufficient evidence (thresholds: ready needs no dimension below 3; 2+ dimensions at 2 or below is not yet ready) — with a handoff-ready Markdown assessment. Read-only; not for triaging a single AI idea (use triage_ai_opportunity).
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| risks | No | Optional risk register entries; scoring gaps should each become one. | |
| useCases | Yes | Candidate AI use cases, each classified start-now, prepare-first, or defer. | |
| dimensions | Yes | All five readiness dimensions, each scored 1-5 with evidence, or marked unknown. | |
| sequencing | No | Optional 30-60-90 day sequencing recommendation. | |
| preparedFor | No | Optional sponsor or requester the assessment is prepared for. | |
| organizationName | Yes | The organization or team being assessed. |
TDQS
A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true) are consistent with description. Description adds detailed behavioral context: deterministic verdict, threshold logic, and that it's read-only, beyond what annotations provide.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness4/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Description is well-structured with front-loaded purpose, detailed thresholds, and sibling reference. Slightly verbose but every sentence adds value; could be more concise but not excessively long.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness5/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Despite no output schema and complex nested inputs, the description covers the assessment logic, verdict determination, and output format (Markdown). It is thorough enough for an AI to understand tool behavior and prerequisites.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters4/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% and description does not reiterate parameters, but it adds meaning by explaining the dimensions (data readiness, workflow ownership, etc.) and the scoring/verdict logic, which helps the AI understand how to use the input schema effectively.
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?
Description clearly states it assesses an organization's AI readiness across five dimensions, each scored 1-5, with a deterministic verdict and Markdown output. Distinguishes from sibling tool triage_ai_opportunity by specifying when not to use it.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines5/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly states not for triaging a single AI idea and directs to sibling tool triage_ai_opportunity, providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
triage_ai_opportunityTriage an AI opportunityARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Score one proposed AI workflow across bottleneck severity, value capture, integration readiness, and risk posture. Returns a deterministic go-deeper or hold recommendation and a handoff-ready Markdown artifact. Read-only; not for organization-wide readiness reviews or production rollout planning.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| lenses | Yes | ||
| followUps | No | Up to five questions ranked by how much their answers could change the decision. | |
| confidence | No | Optional confidence override. The rubric supplies a conservative default. | |
| requestedBy | No | Optional person or team requesting the triage. | |
| workflowName | Yes | The specific workflow being evaluated. | |
| decisionContext | Yes | The concrete decision this triage will inform. | |
| canAnswerTopFollowUpInOneBusinessDay | No | Needed only when the total is 10-13: whether the highest-impact follow-up can plausibly be answered within one business day. |
TDQS
A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds value beyond annotations by specifying the tool is read-only (consistent with readOnlyHint), deterministic (consistent with idempotentHint), and outputs a Markdown artifact with a go-deeper or hold recommendation.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the main action, no redundancy, every word earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness4/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's complexity (7 params, nested objects) and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose, output, and scope. It omits optional parameters but schema covers them.
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 86%, so baseline is 3. The description lists the four lenses but adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides.
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 scores an AI workflow across four dimensions and returns a recommendation. It explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool 'assess_ai_readiness' by stating it is not for organization-wide reviews.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines5/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly states when to use (score a proposed AI workflow) and when not to use (not for org-wide readiness or production rollout), providing clear context and excluding alternatives.
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.
2 tool updates
- First observed
assess_ai_readiness - First observed
triage_ai_opportunity
Related MCP Connectors
Read-only AI coding tools for change verification, release readiness, capacity, and guidance.
Read-only approved AI tools, public stacks, guides, and evidence-aware comparisons.
Read-only AI project discovery, verification, comparison, shortlisting, and stack planning.
Public agentic AI doctrine tools plus authenticated architecture, design, and spec validators.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables LLMs and AI agents to perform defensive security posture assessments, privilege escalation surface audits, and post-quantum cryptography readiness checks through read-only diagnostic tools.MIT
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceRead-only MCP tools for coding agents to audit deployment targets, detect fabricated code, review backlog, database schema, analytics, ML models, architecture docs, and decision lenses.117 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceComputes multi-jurisdictional AI compliance readiness scores with sourced penalty math, enabling gap analysis and audit tier recommendations.MIT
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.