Skip to main content
Glama
kwgoodwin

clearon-source-audit

by kwgoodwin

Related Servers

Alternatives to clearon-source-audit

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables scientists and their AI agents to check quoted passages against pinned open-access PubMed Central full texts, look up retraction status from PMC and Crossref, and run recorded literature searches. Every quote check, search and annotation is written to an append-only, hash-chained log that can be verified, giving a dated record of what was searched and found.
      7
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables traceable scholarly literature reviews using free APIs, generating reports where every claim links to evidence IDs.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables scientific due diligence by grading claims against public literature, clinical trials, and filings, with explicit citations and optional attestation.
      4
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables users to audit academic citation contexts, calculate scientific consensus ratios, and generate credibility badge indexes for verified citations through MCP-compliant tools.
      8
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables auditing of revised documents against reviewer comments, providing evidence-based status, confidence, and traceability for each issue via natural language.
      MIT

    TDQS

    B3.4/5.0

    Scored across 9 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but run_mechanical_checks and generate_source_report both involve opt-in URL availability checks and exception discovery, so an agent could hesitate between the check step and the report step. All other boundaries, such as registering a source versus creating an audit versus recording a claim mapping, are clear.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All nine tools consistently follow a snake_case verb_noun pattern: register_source, create_source_audit, list_source_audits, run_mechanical_checks, acknowledge_finding, and so on. There are no mixed conventions or ambiguous generic verbs.

    Tool Count5/5

    Nine tools is well-scoped for a source-audit workflow, covering health checks, source registration, audit lifecycle, claim mapping, mechanical verification, report generation, and finding acknowledgement. Each tool occupies a meaningful workflow slot without redundancy or excessive granularity.

    Completeness4/5

    The core audit lifecycle is well covered: register sources, create audits, map claims, run checks, acknowledge findings, and generate reports. A minor gap is that sources and findings cannot be independently listed or managed outside of an audit, though agents can work around this through get/list audits and report output.

    Maintenance

    ActivitySlowing
    ResponsivenessNo issues