Technical Answer Validator
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| TAV_HOST | No | Host to bind the service to. Defaults to 127.0.0.1. | 127.0.0.1 |
| TAV_PORT | No | Port to listen on. Defaults to 8080. | 8080 |
| TAV_API_KEY | No | A long random secret at least 24 characters. Required unless TAV_API_KEYS is set. | |
| TAV_API_KEYS | No | JSON object mapping each client ID to the generated SHA-256 digest. When set, it takes precedence over TAV_API_KEY. |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| prompts | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| resources | {
"subscribe": false,
"listChanged": false
} |
| experimental | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| evaluate_answerA | Check an answer against caller-provided concepts, synonyms, and numeric requirements. Rubric fields: required_concepts (1-50 strings), optional accepted_synonyms keyed by concept, optional numeric_requirements [{value, unit?, tolerance?}], and optional required_count. No question bank is bundled. Review the returned result; it is not an official exam grade. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
With only a single tool, there is no possibility of overlap or misselection. The tool's purpose—validating an answer against caller-supplied concepts, synonyms, and numeric requirements—is unambiguous.
The lone tool uses a clear snake_case verb_noun convention (evaluate_answer) that is fully self-consistent. There are no competing names or styles to create inconsistency.
A single tool is at the thin end of the scale given the rubric explicitly treats 1-2 tools as borderline. The validation domain is narrow enough that one monolithic tool is defensible, but there is no granularity for separate concerns.
The tool covers the core validation surface well: required concepts, synonyms, numeric requirements with tolerance, and required_count, with a sensible disclaimer about grade authority. Some gaps exist (e.g., no batch evaluation or question-bank management), but agents can work around them.