F
licenseA
qualityB
maintenanceEnables evaluation of patent feature-separation results by listing records, checking alignment with claims and original text, and running deterministic quality gates plus a Judge audit.
3
-
feature-separate-batch-eval-mcp
by 73882
Related Servers
Alternatives to feature-separate-batch-eval-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables conversational patent data analysis through a set of tools for trend analysis, clustering, word cloud generation, and more. Allows natural language queries to explore patent datasets with structured results and visualizations.1AGPL 3.0
- AlicenseBqualityBmaintenanceExposes offline LLM-as-judge evaluation tooling to MCP clients so they can benchmark recorded judges against golden labels, diagnose position and verbosity bias, and fit probability calibrators with agreement, cost-frontier, and rubric-template utilities. It deliberately omits command judges, keeping all analysis standard-library and network-free.41Apache 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceEnables analysis of clinical trial protocols using MCP tools for document listing, entity extraction, adverse event clustering, and summarization.41MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceEnables MCP-compatible clients to search patent rules and prior art across MPEP/USC/CFR and 100M+ patents, run automated 35 USC 112 compliance checks, and generate patent-style diagrams.-
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceEnables MCP-compatible clients to retrieve patent rules from MPEP/USC/CFR, search 100M+ patents via BigQuery, run automated 35 USC 112 compliance reviews, and generate patent-style diagrams.-
TDQS
C2.8/5.0
Scored across 5 tools
Disambiguation4/5
Each tool targets a distinct action: status (list cohorts), tag (assign records), check (validate one cohort), run (execute network eval), insights (list persisted results). Status and check both touch 'readiness' and status/insights both list things, which introduces mild overlap, but descriptions keep them separable.
Naming Consistency4/5
Every tool shares the consistent 'feature_separate_batch_eval_' prefix followed by a short suffix, forming a predictable pattern. Minor deviation in that tag/check/run are verbs while status/insights are nouns, but overall highly consistent.
Tool Count4/5
Five tools is a reasonable, well-scoped set for a batch-evaluation workflow (readiness, tagging, validation, execution, insights). Slightly lean but each tool has a clear role without redundancy.
Completeness3/5
The core lifecycle (list readiness, assign cohorts, validate, run, retrieve insights) is covered, but there is no way to modify/remove cohort assignments or clear/export persisted insights, leaving some dead ends.
Maintenance
ActivitySlowing
ResponsivenessNo issues