A
licenseA
qualityC
maintenanceEnables agents to perform typed judgments—classify, score, check, match, and screen—over closed answer sets with confidence scores, without text generation.
7
4
MIT
jev-mcp
by rashedInt32
Related Servers
Alternatives to jev-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables agents to verify claims against cited evidence, screen content for prompt injection and relevance before reading it, and rank candidates by meaning, all with calibrated probability verdicts.345MIT
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables frontier coding agents to delegate routine probabilistic judgments to TypeSafe Jev, providing calibrated triage signals for failures, attempts, completion, context ranking, findings, risk, and generic evidence-grounded questions.7MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables MCP clients to call TypeSafe's JEV classifier and receive structured, typed judgments with probabilities for binary, choice, and scoring questions.MIT
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceProvides Claude with 44 tools for confidence gating, typed outputs, hallucination detection, and constraint enforcement during conversations.511MIT
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables coding agents to make cheap, fast probabilistic decisions on every turn, with tools for coding-loop checks, review, verification, screening untrusted input, and ranking candidates.6MIT
TDQS
A4.1/5.0
Scored across 5 tools
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: listing models, picking one from a set, scoring on a scale, yes/no checking, and batching multiple independent questions. The descriptions clarify boundaries (e.g., jev_check is specifically for yes/no, while jev_classify handles arbitrary options). No overlap that would cause an agent to misselect.
Naming Consistency4/5
All tools share the consistent 'jev_' prefix, but the second part is mostly verbs (classify, ask, score, check) except for 'models' which is a noun. This is a minor deviation from a strict verb pattern, but still predictable and readable.
Tool Count5/5
Five tools is well-scoped for a classification/scoring API. Each tool earns its place and covers distinct operations without redundancy. This is within the ideal 3-15 range and appropriate for the server's purpose.
Completeness5/5
The surface covers the core operations: model discovery, single-label classification, ordered scoring, binary checks, and batched multi-question inference. There are no obvious gaps for the apparent domain; agents can perform all necessary workflows without workarounds.