Skip to main content
Glama
blasrodri

mcp-truth-check

by blasrodri

Server Configuration

Describes the environment variables required to run the server.

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Instructions

Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.

This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.

Capabilities

Features and capabilities supported by this server

Protocol revision2025-11-25

CapabilityDetails
tools
{}

Tools

Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions

NameDescription
verify_turnA

Fact-check your own claims about code you changed, BEFORE telling the user a change is done — to catch over-claims (wrong values, routes or functions you said you added/removed, files you said you edited, 'I only changed X' scope claims, renames, and 'tests pass'). HOW TO CALL: extract the concrete factual claims from what you're about to say and pass them in claims (one short sentence each) — you parse them far more reliably than truth can re-parse prose, and it's free since you're already writing the message. Also pass the raw message as a backstop. Each claim is checked against the indexed repo + working-tree git diff + recorded command runs + logs and gets a cited supported / contradicted / refused verdict. 'tests pass' is only supported when a matching run recorded via truth run -- <cmd> exited 0 AFTER your last edit. Deterministic: the verdict comes from evidence, not from a model — so listing a claim can't make it pass. 'refused' means unverifiable, NOT confirmed.

Prompts

Interactive templates invoked by user choice

NameDescription

No prompts

Resources

Contextual data attached and managed by the client

NameDescription

No resources

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Scored across 1 tool

Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no ambiguity. The tool's purpose is clearly defined as truth-checking claims.

Naming Consistency5/5

The tool name 'verify_turn' follows a clear verb_noun pattern, consistent with itself.

Tool Count3/5

A single tool is borderline. The server's scope is narrow (fact-checking), but a single tool handling all verification aspects seems reasonable yet thin.

Completeness2/5

The tool requires pre-recorded command runs for checking 'tests pass', but no tool is provided to record such runs, creating a significant gap in the workflow.

Maintenance

ActivityStale
ResponsivenessNo issues