Skip to main content
Glama
README.md
# Preflight MCP Server

TrustPilot for APIs, built for AI agents. Independent reliability ratings for every API and MCP server — powered by synthetic probes and crowdsourced agent telemetry.

## Install

```bash
pip install preflight-mcp
```

## Usage

### As a standalone MCP server

```bash
preflight-mcp
```

### With Claude Desktop

Add to your Claude Desktop MCP config:

```json
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "preflight": {
      "command": "preflight-mcp"
    }
  }
}
```

### With Claude Code

```bash
/plugin install preflight@claude-plugins-official
```

## Tools

### check_reliability

Look up the independent reliability rating for any service.

```
check_reliability(service="openai-api")
```

### compare_services

Compare ratings side by side to pick the most reliable provider.

```
compare_services(services=["openai-api", "anthropic-api"])
```

### report_outcome

Leave a review — report what happened when you called a service. Improves ratings for everyone.

```
report_outcome(service="openai-api", outcome="success", latency_ms=200)
```

## Configuration

| Variable | Default | Description |
|----------|---------|-------------|
| `PREFLIGHT_API_URL` | `https://preflight.beamt.io` | API base URL |
| `PREFLIGHT_API_KEY` | (none) | API key for authenticated requests |

Get a free API key at [beamt.io/preflight](https://beamt.io/preflight).

## License

MIT

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Scored across 3 tools

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: check_reliability evaluates a single service, compare_services compares multiple services side-by-side, and report_outcome submits user feedback. There is no overlap in functionality—an agent would never confuse which tool to use for a given task.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with clear, descriptive names: check_reliability, compare_services, and report_outcome. The naming is uniform and predictable, making it easy for agents to understand each tool's function at a glance.

Tool Count3/5

With only 3 tools, the server feels slightly thin for its reliability-checking domain. While the tools cover core functions, additional utilities like listing top-rated services or fetching historical trends might be expected. However, the count is not severely inadequate.

Completeness4/5

The toolset covers the essential reliability workflow: checking individual services, comparing them, and contributing data. A minor gap is the lack of a tool to fetch aggregated reliability data (e.g., a leaderboard or trending services), but agents can work around this by using compare_services with a predefined list.