ejentum-mcp
OfficialRelated Servers
Alternatives to ejentum-mcp
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceSimple sequential thinking MCP in python1281 PyPI4MIT
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables MCP clients like Claude to interact with any A2A agent as four callable tools, handling multi-turn memory, long-running turns, and separating reasoning from answers.43 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceExposes DeepSeek Harness capabilities—durable memory, task ledger, project-agent dispatch, and the wider MCP estate—as declared MCP tools for any MCP client.170 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceA plug-and-play MCP server that adds zero-boilerplate tools like file search, reliability scoring, and prompt injection detection to any MCP-compatible agent.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI agents to securely discover, invoke, and manage tools through a hardened MCP endpoint with protections like injection detection, circuit breakers, retry backoff, response caching, context-window limiting, and state snapshots.1 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI agents to discover and execute tools via a secure MCP server with JWT authentication, RBAC, rate limiting, and audit logging.1MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceMCP server for the Junction41 platform, providing 125 tools for agent lifecycle, jobs, workspace, payments, bounties, and more, enabling LLMs to interact with Junction41.11 npmMIT
TDQS
Scored across 4 tools
Each tool targets a distinct cognitive failure mode: deception detection, code generation, memory/perception, and reasoning. The descriptions clearly differentiate their triggers and purposes, leaving no ambiguity between them.
All tools follow a consistent 'harness_<domain>' pattern with snake_case, making it predictable and easy to understand the focus of each tool from its name alone.
With 4 tools, the set is compact but covers the main cognitive scaffolding needs. It could potentially include more fine-grained tools (e.g., harness_planning), but the current count is reasonable and well-scoped.
The tools address key areas: deception, coding, memory, and reasoning. While additional domains like planning or explanation could be included, the existing set provides a coherent coverage for typical LLM failure modes.