Skip to main content
Glama
Inarus

provgraf-mcp

by Inarus
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Related Servers

Alternatives to provgraf-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • artagon-vault-mcp

      artagon
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Read-only MCP server for querying an evidence-aware knowledge vault with temporal and provenance-aware data, supporting agent memory and semantic graph projections.
      -

    • graphiti-folder

      notx2wice
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      A read-only MCP server that lets you search current and historical facts from a time-indexed knowledge graph derived from a folder of Markdown/text documents, with verification against original sources. It exposes tools for status, fact search, history search, and revision lookup while keeping document insertion and modification to the CLI.
      3
      MIT

    • dsh-narrative-ledger

      dongsheng123132
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      MCP server for verifying narrative consistency and querying story-state facts in DeepSeek Harness, exposing read-only ledger tools for canonical evidence and continuity checks.
      2
      MIT

    • swarm-mcp

      jcosta33
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      An MCP server that exposes Swarm's fact reconciliation to AI agents, allowing them to query scope, evidence gaps, and review requirements without being able to issue a final verdict.
      10
      3 npm
      1
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    A3.7/5.0

    Scored across 5 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool serves a clear, distinct purpose: listing facts, retrieving a single fact with provenance, semantic search, finding precedents, and running integrity checks. No two tools overlap in intent, and the descriptions make selection unambiguous.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Tool names use a consistent lowercase_with_underscores style and mostly follow verb_noun patterns (list_facts, get_fact), but 'search', 'precedents', and 'check' deviate slightly—'precedents' is a noun and 'search'/'check' are bare verbs. Still, the style is uniform and readable, so the inconsistency is minor.

    Tool Count5/5

    With 5 tools, the server is well-scoped for its purpose—querying facts with provenance, searching, and checking integrity. Each tool earns its place, and the count is comfortably within the ideal 3–15 range.

    Completeness4/5

    The server covers the core read-side operations for the domain: listing, retrieving, searching, finding precedents, and integrity checks. Since it appears to be a read-only provenance query service, it lacks mutation tools, but that's likely by design. Minor gap: no explicit way to fetch a raw document or list all clients, though these are discoverable via search and list_facts.

    Maintenance

    ActivitySlowing
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources