Trust Engine MCP
Related Servers
Alternatives to Trust Engine MCP
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI agents to query model pricing, deprecations, and cost estimates via a machine-readable changelog of the AI stack.1MIT- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables agents to rank model variants and hunt down API offers for a specific task, estimate real billed cost, audit n8n/Make automations for overpay, missing fallbacks and deprecated models, and plan or run evaluation and canary suites on the user's own examples. It also supports price comparison, custom reseller channels with measured per-call cost, and non-LLM capabilities such as web search and speech-to-text.AGPL 3.0
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceChecks OpenAI, Anthropic and Google model IDs for retirement: status, retirement date, days left and replacement, from the providers' deprecation pages, re-checked daily. Can also scan a project folder for retired or retiring model IDs with file and line, and list what retires in the next N days. No API key needed.231,042 npm1Elastic 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables auditing the AI models and SDKs in a repository, drafting evaluation examples, ranking candidates by cost per passing answer, and generating cheapest-first routing configurations, all through read-only local tools that never make network calls. Also estimates monthly token spend and local weights/KV-cache memory so users can pick and size the cheapest model that passes their own tests.1072 PyPI7MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables assistants to access up-to-date LLM pricing, context windows, and model identifiers, with tools to estimate costs, find cheapest models, and check scheduled price changes.61 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables querying a single normalised, deduplicated feed of AI model releases, price changes, API changes and deprecations across vendor notes, Hugging Face, OpenRouter, GitHub and the LiteLLM price map. Also supports model lookup by budget, context and capability, side-by-side comparisons, monthly cost estimates in USD and KRW, and ranked replacement suggestions when a model goes away.293 npmMIT
TDQS
Scored across 9 tools
Most tools have clearly separate roles: scan_for_models discovers models in code, check_my_models evaluates specific ids, model_retirements browses the catalogue, analyze_usage handles spend, and the pilot trio (prepare_pilot_tasks, request_pilot, pricing) splits drafting tasks, drafting email, and pricing. The retirement trio (scan/check/model_retirements) overlaps in subject matter and the descriptions spend a lot of words redirecting between them, which is the main source of possible misselection.
All names are snake_case and readable, but the pattern mixes verb-led names (scan_for_models, analyze_usage, estimate_switch_savings, prepare_pilot_tasks, request_pilot) with bare noun names (benchmark_results, model_retirements, pricing). The deviation is minor and each noun name still maps to a clear resource.
Nine tools is squarely in the well-scoped range, and each one maps to a distinct step in the retirement/cost workflow: discover, check, browse, analyse, benchmark, estimate, prepare, request, price. None looks like filler or a duplicate.
The surface covers the full advisory lifecycle for model retirement and cost optimisation, including a human-in-the-loop pilot handoff and pricing. Gaps are modest: savings estimates only work for benchmarked model pairs, usage exports only accept OpenAI/Anthropic, and there is no tool to set up the advertised 24/7 watch or re-check a model over time.