errorbar
Related Servers
Alternatives to errorbar
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables MCP-compatible clients to access model registry, prediction logging, drift detection, bias/fairness auditing, compliance and governance queries, explanation generation, LLM/RAG monitoring, content safety, alert management, multi-agent workflow tracking, and performance metrics through 197 tools across 18 domains. Supports stdio and hosted Streamable HTTP transports, plus MCP Apps interactive audit cards.66 PyPIMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables MCP clients to count tokens and estimate costs, run BM25 search, compare model evaluations with paired bootstrap and McNemar tests, validate JSON Schema output, and scan for prompt injection and PII.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceExposes identity, tools, workflows, guardrails, and evaluation as MCP tools — so any AI agent can read and write your ecosystem programmatically.15 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceExposes MCP tools to list and inspect the 48 harm-ladder tasks, deterministically score a submitted decision trace, run a full evaluation against a mock or real model provider, and retrieve data provenance. This lets developers measure a model's pushback and refusal calibration as plan harm rises, directly from any MCP client.19 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceExposes hundreds of MCP tools through just four (browse, search, load schemas, and call), so models pay only for the tool definitions they need instead of every schema on every turn. Every call is validated and guarded, with unknown-argument rejection, placeholder detection, timeouts, an audit log, and error hints.Apache 2.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables OpenAI-compatible clients to access external tools, APIs, repositories, and data sources through MCP with allowlisting, approval, and argument validation, deployable as a FastAPI service or Python library.MIT
TDQS
Scored across 81 tools
Most tools target distinct resource+action combos, but there are genuine overlaps: can_i_ship and get_eval_gate both serve as CI-gate verdicts on finished eval runs, and is_my_judge_trustworthy largely re-reads trust/TPR/TNR/drift data already present in get_criterion and list_criteria. Additionally, create_eval and screen_my_traffic both support 'is a cheaper model better' screening, though the descriptions try to disambiguate them.
The dominant pattern is clean verb_noun snake_case (list_*, create_*, get_*, update_*, delete_*, cancel_*) applied consistently across 20+ resource domains. The exceptions are notable but few: the first-person sentence-style names can_i_ship, is_my_judge_trustworthy, and screen_my_traffic break the convention, and upsert_alias/auto_improve_criterion deviate slightly from standard CRUD verbs.
81 tools is far beyond a typical MCP surface and will substantially bloat agent context and increase misselection risk, even though the underlying platform genuinely spans many domains (evals, fine-tuning, GRPO, dedicated endpoints, audit, labels, datasets). The breadth is real but the tool count is still excessive for an agent-facing interface, sitting at the extreme end of 'too many.'
Core lifecycles are thoroughly covered for most resources: criteria, evals, dedicated endpoints, batches, fine-tuning jobs, GRPO runs, model versions, and logs all have create/read/list/update/delete or cancel where appropriate. Notable gaps exist: datasets are create-only (no list/get/delete for created datasets), label sets cannot be deleted, training files cannot be removed, and labels have no delete operation—gaps that will matter for cleanup workflows in an audit-focused platform.