Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to JevMCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables coding or reasoning agents to request structured judgments from TypeSafe's Jev model at decision points, including choices, scores, claim verification, and code reviews, with probabilities and confidence returned as data.
      5
      MIT
    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to obtain typed judgments from TypeSafe's Jev System One models, including yes/no probabilities, multiple-choice selections with distributions, and rubric-based scores, directly usable in code.
      5
      1
      AGPL 3.0
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables frontier coding agents to delegate routine probabilistic judgments to TypeSafe Jev, providing calibrated triage signals for failures, attempts, completion, context ranking, findings, risk, and generic evidence-grounded questions.
      7
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables Claude Code agents to perform structured decision-making through TypeSafe Jev, supporting yes/no checks, route selection, scoring, and batched multi-question judgments with confidence values.
      1
      -
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding agents to make fast, zero-output-token decisions by evaluating context, diffs, logs, or options through the OpenRouter Decisions API using TypeSafe Jev, returning calibrated probabilities for binary, categorical, or scoring questions.
      1
      136 npm
      2
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables Claude Code or any MCP client to ask TypeSafe's Jev for calibrated, typed judgments (probabilities, choices, scores) instead of prose, with local caching and cost tracking.
      MIT

    TDQS

    A4.7/5.0

    Scored across 1 tool

    Disambiguation5/5

    With only a single tool, there is no possibility of confusing one tool with another. The tool's multiple question types (noul, choice, score) are clearly delineated within the one tool, so agents can disambiguate the intended use from the parameter descriptions.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    The sole tool name 'jev_ask' follows a clean snake_case convention with a descriptive verb. As there is no other tool to compare against, no naming inconsistencies or mixed conventions exist.

    Tool Count4/5

    At one tool, the server is on the low end of tool counts, but for the narrow purpose of classifier-based file questioning, a single comprehensive tool is reasonable. It slightly under-utilizes the typical 3-15 tool range, yet it does not feel excessively thin given its focused scope.

    Completeness5/5

    The single tool covers multiple question types, batching, and uncertainty handling, addressing the full lifecycle of querying files without needing additional operations. The documented limitations (weak at counting, math, dates, multi-step reasoning) are clearly stated, so there are no hidden gaps in the tool surface.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues