Skip to main content
Glama
jerepaira

laya-mcp

by jerepaira
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to laya-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • jev-flash-router

      Ravinder82
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding agents to make fast, zero-output-token decisions by evaluating context, diffs, logs, or options through the OpenRouter Decisions API using TypeSafe Jev, returning calibrated probabilities for binary, categorical, or scoring questions.
      1
      136 npm
      2
      MIT

    • mcp_jev

      pedroknigge
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Runs TypeSafe Jev System One packs locally, enabling agents to perform typed Choice, Noul, and Score judgments for tasks like PR auditing, intent routing, and locale classification.
      5
      MIT

    • askjev

      pZacca
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables agents to get fast, calibrated probabilistic answers from Jev (Typesafe AI) to yes/no, scale, or choice questions about provided material, without using a generative model.
      1
      MIT

    • openrouter-jev-mcp

      ctmx
      A
      license
      B
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables coding agents to obtain probabilistic decisions from Jev AI via OpenRouter for classification, scoring, and validation, with tools like jev_check, jev_classify, jev_score, and jev_evaluate.
      5
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    A3.5/5.0

    Scored across 4 tools

    Disambiguation2/5

    decide is a generic decision engine that can handle choice and score types, which substantially overlaps with classify and score. The specialized tools add context (text vs. state), but the boundaries are not crisp, and an agent could easily misselect decide for tasks the others are designed for.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All four tool names are single lowercase verbs with no mixed conventions or inconsistent patterns. The imperative style is consistent and easy to predict, even if the verbs are somewhat generic.

    Tool Count4/5

    Four tools is a reasonable number for a decision/classification/rating server. However, decide's broad scope makes classify, score, and check feel somewhat redundant, so the count earns slightly less than full marks.

    Completeness4/5

    The set covers common decision tasks: choice/classification, ordered scoring, and yes/no checking, plus the generic noul type through decide. Minor gaps exist around batch processing or clearer support for unstructured outputs, but the core decision surface appears well covered.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources