agent-eval
Related Servers
Alternatives to agent-eval
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceDeterministic time-series statistics for AI agents. This MCP server gives any LLM agent unit-tested statistical tools — anomaly detection, changepoint detection, seasonal decomposition, stationarity/trend tests, data-quality audits, baseline forecasts — with schema-validated structured output and no arbitrary code execution.17MIT
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceMCP server that provides tools for evaluating LLM agent reliability, including adversarial task generation, automated LLM-as-judge assessment, and confidence statistics.31MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceMCP server that diagnoses RAG pipeline regression by detecting which failure modes (e.g., retrieval miss, hallucination) significantly regressed, not just score drops, using statistical methods to avoid false alarms.-
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceMCP server that lets coding agents test AI agents. Create YAML test cases, snapshot golden baselines, check for regressions, and generate visual reports all from inside Claude Code or any MCP-compatible tool. Works with LangGraph, CrewAI, OpenAI, Claude, Mistral, and any HTTP API.10114 npm2,050 PyPI140Apache 2.0
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceAn MCP server that exposes causal inference methods (difference-in-differences, synthetic control, propensity matching, and assumption checks) as callable tools, enabling AI agents to run deterministic statistical analyses instead of computing them inline.-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA local MCP server that provides tools for AI coding agents to execute, evaluate, and diff regression tests for LLM agents.4 npmMIT
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
Only one tool exists, so there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap. The single tool has a clear, well-defined purpose (running a CLI comparison).
With only one tool, the naming is internally consistent, but the name 'run' is generic and does not convey the tool's statistical comparison purpose. It follows no distinctive pattern, but there are no deviations to penalize heavily.
A single tool is on the thin side for a server, even one with a narrow purpose. While the tool fully addresses the comparison task, the lack of any supplementary tools (e.g., for generating scores or listing subcommands) makes the server feel minimal.
The tool covers the core need—comparing two sets of scores and returning a statistical verdict. The description explicitly scopes it to comparison only, and within that scope it is complete. However, it relies on the CLI to potentially expose other subcommands (via --help), so there could be untapped functionality, leaving a minor gap.