Skip to main content
Glama
bennyp11

BytesJev PlanningChecker

by bennyp11

Related Servers

Alternatives to BytesJev PlanningChecker

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables agents to evaluate whether a product-adoption message is worth sending by applying a fixed, evidence-based rubric to a draft, recipient context, evidence, and the agent's own assessment, returning a send, revise, or hold recommendation with a score and reasons.
      2
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables coding agents to scout, rank, and preflight software work before implementation, returning evidence-backed ACT, VERIFY, or SKIP decisions for issues and pull requests.
      60 npm
      2
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Provides local, read-only recommendations for reasoning effort, retry or escalation guidance, and integration boundaries, enabling compatible desktop apps to suggest effort levels without modifying the active conversation.
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Provides a read-only approval gate for AI agent commerce actions, reviewing up to five non-sensitive actions and returning decisions and required evidence without executing, paying, or signing.
      -
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Provides offline, evidence-based preflight risk assessment for agent actions, returning revision-pinned incident patterns and unresolved verification gates to help prevent past failures from recurring.
      -

    TDQS

    A4.5/5.0

    Scored across 1 tool

    Disambiguation5/5

    With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or misselection between tools. The tool's purpose is clearly distinct by default.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    A single tool named 'PlanningChecker' follows a consistent naming pattern by itself. There are no other tools to create inconsistency, so the naming is perfectly consistent within the set.

    Tool Count4/5

    The server's purpose is a single advisory check, so one tool is appropriate and well-scoped. It is slightly below the typical 3-15 range, but the narrow focus justifies the minimal surface.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool covers the full stated purpose of checking a plan for overengineering, with no obvious missing operations for an advisory service. Minor gaps like history or batch processing are not required for its core function.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues