Skip to main content
Glama

AgentDesk MCP — Adversarial AI Review

npm version npm downloads License: MIT Tests MCP

Quality control for AI pipelines — one MCP tool. Works with Claude Code, Claude Desktop, and any MCP client.

29.5% of teams do NO evaluation of AI outputs. (LangChain Survey) Knowledge workers spend 4.3 hours/week fact-checking AI outputs. (Microsoft 2025)

AgentDesk MCP fixes this. Add independent adversarial review to any AI pipeline in 30 seconds.

Quick Start

npx @ezark-publish/agentdesk-mcp

Claude Code

claude mcp add agentdesk-mcp -- npx @ezark-publish/agentdesk-mcp

Claude Desktop

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "agentdesk-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "@ezark-publish/agentdesk-mcp"],
      "env": { "ANTHROPIC_API_KEY": "sk-ant-..." }
    }
  }
}

HTTP Transport (Streamable HTTP)

Run as an HTTP server for remote access, Smithery hosting, or multi-client setups:

# Start with HTTP transport on port 3100
MCP_HTTP_PORT=3100 npx @ezark-publish/agentdesk-mcp

# Or use the --http flag (defaults to port 3100)
npx @ezark-publish/agentdesk-mcp --http

MCP endpoint: POST http://localhost:3100/mcp Health check: GET http://localhost:3100/health

Install from GitHub (alternative)

npm install github:Rih0z/agentdesk-mcp

Requirements

  • ANTHROPIC_API_KEY environment variable (uses your own key — BYOK)

Related MCP server: open-code-review

Tools

review_output

Adversarial quality review of any AI-generated output. An independent reviewer assumes the author made mistakes and actively looks for problems.

Input:

Parameter

Required

Description

output

Yes

The AI-generated output to review

criteria

No

Custom review criteria

review_type

No

Category: code, content, factual, translation, etc.

model

No

Reviewer model (default: claude-sonnet-4-6)

Output:

{
  "verdict": "PASS | FAIL | CONDITIONAL_PASS",
  "score": 82,
  "issues": [
    {
      "severity": "high",
      "category": "accuracy",
      "description": "Claim about X is unsupported",
      "suggestion": "Add citation or remove claim"
    }
  ],
  "checklist": [
    {
      "item": "Factual accuracy",
      "status": "pass",
      "evidence": "All statistics match cited sources"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Overall assessment...",
  "reviewer_model": "claude-sonnet-4-6"
}

review_dual

Dual adversarial review — two independent reviewers assess the output from different angles, then a merge agent combines findings.

  • If either reviewer finds a critical issue → merged verdict is FAIL

  • Takes the lower score

  • Combines and deduplicates all issues

Use for high-stakes outputs where quality is critical.

Same parameters as review_output.

How It Works

  1. Adversarial prompting: The reviewer is instructed to assume mistakes were made. No benefit of the doubt.

  2. Evidence-based checklist: Every PASS item requires specific evidence. Items without evidence are automatically downgraded to FAIL.

  3. Anti-gaming validation: If >30% of checklist items lack evidence, the entire review is forced to FAIL with a capped score of 50.

  4. Structured output: Verdict + numeric score + categorized issues + checklist (not just "looks good").

Use Cases

  • Code review: Check for bugs, security issues, performance problems

  • Content review: Verify accuracy, readability, SEO, audience fit

  • Factual verification: Validate claims in AI-generated text

  • Translation quality: Check accuracy and naturalness

  • Data extraction: Verify completeness and correctness

  • Any AI output: Summaries, reports, proposals, emails, etc.

Why Not Just Ask the Same AI to Review?

Self-review has systematic leniency bias. An LLM reviewing its own output shares the same blind spots that created the errors. Research shows models are 34% more likely to use confident language when hallucinating.

AgentDesk uses a separate reviewer invocation with adversarial prompting — fundamentally different from self-review.

Comparison

Feature

AgentDesk MCP

Manual prompt

Braintrust

DeepEval

One-tool setup

Yes

No

No

No

Adversarial review

Yes

DIY

No

No

Dual reviewer

Yes

DIY

No

No

Anti-gaming validation

Yes

No

No

No

No SDK required

Yes

Yes

No

No

MCP native

Yes

No

No

No

Limitations

  • Prompt injection: Like all LLM-as-judge systems, adversarial inputs could attempt to manipulate reviewer verdicts. The anti-gaming validation layer mitigates superficial gaming, but determined adversarial inputs remain a challenge. For high-stakes use cases, combine with deterministic validation.

  • BYOK cost: Each review_output call makes 1 LLM API call; review_dual makes 3. Factor this into your pipeline costs.

Hosted API (Separate Product)

For teams that prefer HTTP integration, a hosted REST API with additional features (agent marketplace, context learning, workflows) is available at agentdesk.usedevtools.com.

Development

git clone https://github.com/Rih0z/agentdesk-mcp.git
cd agentdesk-mcp
npm install
npm test        # 35 tests
npm run build

License

MIT


Built by EZARK Consulting | Web Version

Install Server
A
license - permissive license
A
quality
C
maintenance

Maintenance

Maintainers
Response time
Release cycle
1Releases (12mo)
Commit activity

Related MCP Servers

  • A
    license
    -
    quality
    -
    maintenance
    Enables AI-assisted code review with bias mitigation strategies through cross-model evaluation and bias-aware prompting. Detects AI-generated code from commit authors and provides structured reviews with security, performance, and maintainability analysis.
    Last updated
  • F
    license
    A
    quality
    B
    maintenance
    AI-powered code review tool that detects AI-generated code defects invisible to traditional linters — hallucinated packages, deprecated APIs, cross-file contradictions, hidden security anti-patterns, and over-engineering. Works as a standalone CLI, GitHub Action, or MCP server. Supports TypeScript, Python, Java, Go, and Kotlin. Free for individuals, no API key required.
    Last updated
    4
    32
  • A
    license
    -
    quality
    A
    maintenance
    Human-evaluation infrastructure for AI quality. 25,000+ blind human reviews by 200+ verified reviewers across 58 AI models — query the data via five MCP tools (get_model_scores, compare_models, get_flags, check_content, get_latest).
    Last updated
    2
    MIT

View all related MCP servers

Related MCP Connectors

  • Deterministic trust gate for AI output: leaked-secret, prompt-injection & PII in one call.

  • Pay-per-call cybersecurity for AI agents: vuln scans, threat intel, compliance, code security.

  • AI QA tester — real browsers scan sites for bugs, SEO, perf, and accessibility issues via chat.

View all MCP Connectors

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Rih0z/agentdesk-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server