Skip to main content
Glama
elevanaltd

debate-hall-mcp

by elevanaltd
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Related Servers

Alternatives to debate-hall-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • multi-agent-debate-mcp

      albinjal
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Facilitates structured multi-agent debates with arguments, rebuttals, and judgments across multiple rounds, enabling diverse AI personas to engage in formal debate and collaborative problem-solving.
      1
      19 npm
      17
      MIT

    • Koncordia

      mikegazzaruso
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to debate styleguides, rules, decisions, or specs in a shared room until they reach consensus, producing a versioned artifact and a transcript of the negotiation.
      MIT

    • DebateTalk MCP

      DebateTalk-AI
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables AI assistants to facilitate structured multi-model debates that synthesize multiple perspectives into clear categories like ground truths and blind spots. It provides tools for running real-time debates, checking model health, and managing history via the Model Context Protocol.
      58 npm
      1
      MIT

    • brainstorm-mcp

      spranab
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables multi-round brainstorming debates between multiple AI models like GPT, DeepSeek, and Ollama to produce synthesized final outputs. Users can orchestrate parallel model interactions where AI agents critique and refine each other's ideas to reach a consolidated conclusion.
      7
      392 npm
      71
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

    TDQS

    C2.9/5.0

    Scored across 17 tools

    Disambiguation3/5

    Most tools are distinct, but init_debate, run_debate, resolve_question, consult, and convene all create or orchestrate sessions, so an agent could easily pick the wrong one. Descriptions separate manual vs auto vs committee/consultation modes, yet the overlapping names and session-creating behavior leave some ambiguity.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Tool names are predominantly snake_case with a verb-first pattern (init_debate, add_turn, get_debate, close_debate, run_debate). A few names deviate, such as github_sync_debate (noun-led), human_interject (no direct object), and bare consult/convene, but the pattern is still readable and mostly predictable.

    Tool Count3/5

    The 17 tools exceed the typical 3-15 well-scoped range, and several utilities (force_close_debate, tombstone_turn, human_interject) are niche. The set still covers multiple subdomains, but the count feels heavy and includes some redundant high-level conveniences like resolve_question on top of run_debate+extract_decision_record.

    Completeness2/5

    The core debate lifecycle has init, add, get, close, force close, speaker picking, and tombstoning, but there is no way to list active debates or delete/archive a thread. More critically, consult and convene create sessions that return awaiting states, yet no tool exists to add advisor/committee turns, leaving those workflows half-built.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessResponsive

    Resources