Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to Plot & Kin

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables users to conduct evidence-driven product research through MCP by importing documents, extracting JavaScript code clues, recording cited facts and inferences, tracking validation, managing research lifecycles, and exporting Markdown or JSON reports. It provides 25 MCP tools for turning source materials into traceable research findings and verification plans.
      25
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables users to conduct inspectable research with native Codex or Claude providers, producing locally saved dossiers with source-linked findings, evidence levels, falsifiers, limitations, and recorded retrieval events.
      7 npm
      2
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables a connected frontier-model assistant to develop research grant proposals with traceable evidence, claim review, and versioned drafts. It preserves source passages, judgments, proposal versions, and editable exports in a local research workspace.
      2
      MIT
    • A
      license
      C
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables users to search scientific literature metadata across OpenAlex, Europe PMC, and Crossref, verify citations, retractions, source quotes, and claims, and build or export hash-chained evidence ledgers with explicit provenance and limitations.
      35
      5
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables revision-bound source audits with exact article fingerprinting, claim-to-source mapping, quotation verification, and immutable JSON evidence reports for prepublication review.
      9
      MIT

    TDQS

    C2.9/5.0

    Scored across 37 tools

    Disambiguation3/5

    Many tools have distinct purposes, but setup_status and welcome have identical descriptions, and the processing cluster (processing_queue, pages_process, page_process, page_retry) plus the transfer trio (project_transfer, transfer_recover, transfer_status) can be confused. Descriptions help, but an agent may still misselect among similar-sounding operations.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Nearly all names use snake_case and are readable, with predictable noun_verb or verb_noun patterns for related resources (project_*, source_*, page_*). Minor inconsistencies include singular/plural (page_process vs pages_process) and one-word welcome, but no chaotic mixing.

    Tool Count2/5

    37 tools is excessive for most agent workflows; while the property-history research domain is complex, this count exceeds the 25+ threshold where tools become hard to discover and select. Several tools could be consolidated (setup_status/welcome, processing queue/process/retry).

    Completeness4/5

    The surface covers the core research lifecycle: project creation, source import/read/search, page processing, passage/entity/claim proposal, review, budget, transfer, restore, export, and dossier. Minor gaps include no explicit delete/archive or direct update for projects/claims/sources, but provenance-preserving design makes these less critical.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessOutdated data