spec-score-mcp
Spec Score MCP
Score your specs before Claude builds from them.
A balanced spec produces balanced code. An unbalanced spec produces creative fiction.
The problem
When your spec is detailed on some axes but vague on others, Claude doesn't ask for clarification — it fills in the blanks. The result compiles, the tests pass, but it's not what you meant.
This tool catches that before you start building. It scores your spec on 4 axes, tells you which one is weakest, and gives you a concrete tip to fix it.
Related MCP server: MCP Prompt Optimizer
4 axes
Axis | Question it answers |
completeness | Can Claude understand the full scope of what to build? |
clarity | Is there only one way to interpret this spec? |
constraints | Does Claude know what NOT to build? |
specificity | Are there concrete, testable details? |
Each axis scores 0.0 to 1.0. The balance score measures how evenly the 4 axes are covered.
Balance matters more than individual scores. A spec scoring 0.50 on all 4 axes (balance: 0.97) will produce better output than one scoring 0.95 / 0.95 / 0.20 / 0.90 (balance: 0.58). Why? That one weak axis — constraints at 0.20 — is exactly where Claude will improvise. You described what to build in detail, but forgot to say what's out of scope. So Claude builds everything you asked for, plus features you didn't.
On the radar chart: an even diamond beats a sharp spike.
Verdicts
Verdict | What it means |
SHIP IT | Spec is ready — Claude knows what to build and what not to |
ALMOST | One axis needs a small fix before you start |
DRAFT | Multiple axes need work, but the structure is there |
VAGUE | Well-organized but too abstract to act on |
UNBOUNDED | Clear goal but no boundaries — Claude will over-build |
OVER-CONSTRAINED | Lots of rules but unclear what the actual goal is |
SKETCH | Starting point — needs detail on most axes |
Not SHIP IT yet? The tool tells you which axis is weakest and what to add. Fix that axis, re-score, repeat. Most specs reach SHIP IT in 2-3 rounds.
Install
git clone https://github.com/openpoem/spec-score-mcp.git
cd spec-score-mcp && npm install && npm run build
claude mcp add spec-score -- node $(pwd)/dist/mcp.jsThe 3 tools are now available in every Claude Code session.
Usage
Slash commands
Clone this repo to get the built-in slash commands:
/project:scan my-feature-spec.mdReads the file, scores it, and writes a my-feature-spec.md.scored.md with scores, verdict, tip, and a radar chart.
/project:compare blueprint.md implementation.mdScores both files and writes a compared.scored.md with side-by-side radar charts.
Direct tool use
The 3 MCP tools work in any Claude Code conversation:
Tool | What it does |
| Scores a spec on 4 axes, returns balance score and verdict |
| Generates an SVG radar chart from scores |
| Side-by-side comparison of two scored specs |
Ask Claude: "Score this spec", "Show me the radar chart", or "Compare these two specs".
Example: from UNBOUNDED to SHIP IT
This tool scoring its own spec — four rounds, each fixing the weakest axis:
Round 1: the idea
Build a spec scoring tool
UNBOUNDED 0.12 Tip: What does 'scoring' mean? What axes? What output?One axis is high (clarity — the goal is clear), everything else is near zero. Claude would build... anything. A web app? A CLI? A VS Code extension? No way to know.
Round 2: add context
Build an MCP server that scores specs on 4 axes: completeness, clarity, constraints, specificity. Each axis is 0.0-1.0. Returns a balance score and verdict.
ALMOST 0.67 Tip: What are the verdicts? What does the tool NOT do?Now Claude knows what to build. But constraints are still weak — it might add auto-fixing, CI integration, a database.
Round 3: add boundaries
Three tools: spec_score, spec_visualize, spec_compare. Non-goals: no auto-fixing, no CI integration, no storage.
SHIP IT 0.84 Tip: Add testable criteria — what balance maps to which verdict?Crossed the threshold. Claude now knows what to build AND what not to build. Specificity is still the weakest axis.
Round 4: add testable details
Balance = 1 - sqrt(variance)/mean. SHIP IT > 0.75, ALMOST > 0.60, plus pattern-based verdicts. Node.js, MCP SDK, stdio transport.
SHIP IT 0.95 Spec is ready for implementation.Four rounds: 0.12 → 0.67 → 0.84 → 0.95. Each round fixed exactly one thing.
The math
Claude scores each axis (0.0 - 1.0)
Normalize the vector:
v / ||v||Balance:
1 - sqrt(variance) / meanVerdict: balance threshold + axis pattern matching
The scoring intelligence comes from Claude, not from the algorithm. The algorithm only measures balance.
Project structure
src/
mcp.ts # MCP server (3 tools)
score.ts # Scoring engine
visualize.ts # SVG radar charts
.claude/
commands/
scan.md # /project:scan command
compare.md # /project:compare commandOpenPoem — spec-score-mcp
MIT License.
© 2026 OpenPoem. info@openpoem.org
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
3 tool updates
v2.0.2- First observed
spec_compare - First observed
spec_score - First observed
spec_visualize
TDQS
Scored across 3 tools
The tools have overlapping purposes that could cause confusion. spec_score and spec_visualize both score a spec on the same four axes and provide the same analysis, making them nearly redundant. Only spec_compare has a clearly distinct function by comparing two specs, but the other two tools are ambiguous in their differentiation.
The naming follows a consistent pattern with all tools using the prefix 'spec_' followed by a verb (compare, score, visualize). This makes the purpose of each tool predictable and readable, though the similarity in naming between spec_score and spec_visualize contributes to the disambiguation issue.
With 3 tools, the count is reasonable for a server focused on spec evaluation. It covers core functions like scoring, comparing, and visualizing specs, which aligns well with the server's purpose, though the overlap between spec_score and spec_visualize suggests the set could be streamlined without losing functionality.
The tool surface is mostly complete for spec evaluation, covering scoring, comparison, and visualization. However, there is a notable gap in tools for editing or updating specs based on the analysis, which could limit workflow coverage. The redundancy between spec_score and spec_visualize also indicates inefficiency rather than a functional gap.
Maintenance
Resources
Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.
Looking for Admin?
If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.
Related MCP Connectors
PQS scores any prompt before the model runs. 8 dimensions. 5 frameworks. Pre-flight, not post-hoc.
Commission a multi-model AI spec committee from your agent; get rubric-scored, build-ready specs.
Checks llms.txt, AI crawler access in robots.txt, and sitemap - with a 0-100 AI readiness score.
Security + bug + perf + refactor audit for Python. Returns 0-10 score + MD report.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA Spec-Driven Development toolkit that transforms LLMs into development agents by providing expert-crafted prompts for generating structured specifications and validating documents across the Requirements → Design → Tasks → Code workflow.1MIT
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceAutomatically analyzes and optimizes AI prompts by calculating clarity scores, detecting risks, asking clarifying questions, and adding domain-specific requirements to improve AI interaction quality.1MIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceVet ClawHub skills before installing them; detects prompt-injection, exfiltration, and other security issues, outputting a risk score with per-finding evidence.7MIT
- AlicenseAqualityFmaintenanceTurn rough requests into rigorously structured prompts for any coding agent. Quality-scored to ≥90/100 across 12 dimensions, calibrated on 1,000+ real coding cases.1132MIT
Latest Blog Posts
- Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)By Om-Shree-0709 on .mcpAgent IdentityOAuth 2.1
- Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an InternBy Om-Shree-0709 on .Agent IdentityMCP SecurityOAuth Delegation
- Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)By Om-Shree-0709 on .Agentic AiPrompt InjectionWebAssembly
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/openpoem/spec-score-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server