Skip to main content
Glama
EmanueleCell4

elliot-mcp

by EmanueleCell4
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to elliot-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • agentseed

      Morningstar202604
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding agents to enforce spec-driven development and verify code before it is marked done, using six tools that catch invented APIs, scan for hallucinated content, check plugin conformance, sandbox-run tests, validate schemas, and record audit evidence.
      771 npm
      8
      PolyForm Noncommercial 1.0.0

    • platao

      Owxessus
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables coding agents to run deterministic completeness audits on code before declaring 'done'—catching unwired modules, placebo tests, swallowed errors, and stubs via AST analysis, entirely offline and free.
      MIT

    • codebase-doctor

      subhajitlucky
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Evidence-backed, read-only codebase diagnostics for coding agents: secrets, dependency, RLS, and source-impact audits with a verify loop and PR review verdicts. Never writes files or uses the network by default.
      7
      0
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

    TDQS

    A3.8/5.0

    Scored across 14 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools target clearly different resources: verify_changes (file diffs), verify_url (HTTP), verify_outcome (sandboxed command), verify_github, verify_npm, verify_attestation are unambiguous. Weaker spots are the report-family (elliot_report summarises receipts, elliot_review_packet packages findings, elliot_audit_finish writes report files) and elliot_record_claim vs elliot_record_behavior, which are distinguished only by careful reading of the descriptions.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    There is a coherent, if dual, convention: elliot_* for audit-state tools and verify_* for external-evidence checks, each with readable verb/noun content. Minor deviations exist (elliot_audit_start / elliot_audit_finish use noun_verb ordering while elliot_record_claim, elliot_record_behavior, elliot_record_review use verb_noun).

    Tool Count4/5

    14 tools sits comfortably in the reasonable band, and each verify_* variant covers a genuinely different evidence source rather than padding. The only mild bloat is the three report/output tools, though each serves a different consumer (user summary, reviewer process, on-disk artifacts).

    Completeness4/5

    The audit lifecycle is well covered end to end: snapshot, audit_start, claim/behavior recording, review_packet, record_review, audit_finish, report. Gaps are minor: no tool to list or inspect individual previously recorded claims/receipts, and no ability to retract an already-accepted claim, plus verification is limited to GitHub and npm among external registries.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessUnresponsive

    Resources