Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to lens-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      GroundLens verifies what an AI system says and does, and seals the result as a signed, offline-verifiable evidence record. This MCP server exposes three tools any agent or client can call: verify_answer (check an answer against its sources under a policy), verify_run (gate an execution trace as ALLOW, REVIEW or DENY), and verify_records (verify a log of evidence records).
      3
      7
      Apache 2.0
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Adversarial AI review API — independent AI reviews another AI's output. Stop LLMs from grading their own homework. Provides automated quality assurance for AI-generated code, content, and other outputs through independent review pipelines.
      4
      5 npm
      3
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Fact-checks and fixes AI outputs by catching hallucinations, repairing broken JSON, and correcting errors before they reach users, with tools for verification, validation, and correction.
      4
      26 npm
      MIT

    TDQS

    A4.1/5.0

    Scored across 9 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Each tool has a distinct function: main validation, PII scrubbing, health check, three deterministic consistency checks, and defect-bank operations. The main confusion risk is lens_consistency_leaks vs lens_consistency_markers, which sound alike but are clearly separated by case-sensitivity and purpose.

    Naming Consistency3/5

    The set mixes verb-initial names like validate_content and scrub_pii with a lens_-prefixed family like lens_consistency_* and lens_catches_*. Within the lens_ families naming is consistent, but the overall convention is not uniform enough for a single predictable pattern.

    Tool Count5/5

    Nine tools is well-scoped for a validation-focused server covering gate validation, PII scrubbing, consistency checks, health, and defect-bank memory. Each tool has a clear role and none feels redundant or extraneous.

    Completeness4/5

    Core workflows are covered: validate content, scrub PII, run deterministic consistency checks, check service health, and read/add to the defect bank. Minor gaps include no update/delete for defect-bank entries and no tool to manage the deny-list used by lens_consistency_leaks, but these are workable limitations.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues