jev-eval-mcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to jev-eval-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseBqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI agents to obtain typed judgments from TypeSafe's Jev System One models, including yes/no probabilities, multiple-choice selections with distributions, and rubric-based scores, directly usable in code.52AGPL 3.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables MCP clients to consult TypeSafe's Jev through a judge tool, answering narrow typed questions with calibrated probabilities instead of prose.32 npm1MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables MCP-capable agents to run TypeSafe's Jev judgment model as typed yes/no, choice, and score tools, with calibrated probabilities, confidence thresholds, escalation for uncertain or non-judgment tasks, and an optional action gate that fails open.1MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceEnables MCP clients to submit bounded semantic-uncertainty judgments to the pinned TypeSafe Jev API, with tools for yes/no, choice, and score evaluations plus optional evidence or context selection.MIT
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables MCP clients to call TypeSafe's JEV classifier and receive structured, typed judgments with probabilities for binary, choice, and scoring questions.18MIT
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceEnables agents to ask TypeSafe AI's Jev decision model typed questions — choices, scores, true/false propositions, and image bounding boxes — about a text or JSON state, returning structured answers with calibrated probabilities and confidence instead of free-form prose. Supports images, multi-question batch calls, and long-context requests over stdio.60MIT
TDQS
Scored across 3 tools
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: jev_map judges items in a list, jev_eval evaluates question wordings against labeled data, and jev_ask runs questions to see answers. There is no overlap or ambiguity in their intended use cases.
All tools share the 'jev_' prefix and use a consistent verb_noun pattern: map, eval, ask. The naming is predictable and clearly indicates the action each tool performs.
With only 3 tools, the server is on the low end of the appropriate range, but each tool covers a distinct phase of the evaluation workflow (prototype, evaluate, triage). The count is reasonable for the narrow domain and does not feel artificially padded.
The tools cover the core lifecycle for question evaluation: jev_ask for prototyping, jev_eval for validating wording, and jev_map for applying judgments at scale. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no tool for managing question sets or exporting results), but these are not blocking for the primary workflow.