Skip to main content
Glama
MattiooFR
by MattiooFR

Related Servers

Alternatives to Jev MCP Server

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables MCP clients to get machine-readable yes/no, choice, and score decisions from TypeSafe Jev, bridging fast classification to Cursor and other clients.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables MCP agents to evaluate content against typed questions (yes/no, choice, or score) in a single parallel call.
      1
      26 npm
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables agents to evaluate single records or batches with dynamically authored typed questions, returning structured decisions and probabilities.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables agents to perform typed judgments—classify, score, check, match, and screen—over closed answer sets with confidence scores, without text generation.
      7
      25
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables agents and services to ask small decision models typed questions about text, JSON, images, or video, returning labels, scores, or yes/no answers over MCP tools or a Jev-compatible HTTP API.
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables MCP clients to call TypeSafe's JEV classifier and receive structured, typed judgments with probabilities for binary, choice, and scoring questions.
      1
      7
      MIT

    TDQS

    A5/5.0

    Scored across 1 tool

    Disambiguation5/5

    There is only one tool, so an agent cannot confuse it with another tool. Its name and description clearly identify it as the evaluation entry point.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    The sole tool uses a clear snake_case verb_noun convention ('jev_evaluate'), consistent with a single-tool surface. No conflicting naming patterns exist.

    Tool Count5/5

    One tool is appropriate because the server is a focused wrapper around a single Jev evaluation operation. The tool is broad enough to handle classification, scoring, choice, and batch use cases, so additional tools would add little value.

    Completeness5/5

    For its stated scope—evaluating supplied text/JSON—the tool covers all core needs: multiple question types, batch evaluation, typed answers, confidence, and usage metadata. The explicit exclusions (fetching URLs, generating explanations) are outside the server's purpose, not missing features.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues