A
licenseNot graded
qualityF
maintenanceEnables comprehensive collection and analysis of ClaudeCode development sessions, including agent tracking, tool usage analytics, and performance metrics.
MIT
io.github.speedofred/ami-survey
by speedofred
Related Servers
Alternatives to io.github.speedofred/ami-survey
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI agents to track LLM costs, enforce budgets, compare models, and estimate expenses through simple tool calls.-
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceProvides cost analysis of AI agent usage by previewing scrubbed metadata before upload and analyzing spend, cache-hit rates, and waste recovery through a local or remote server.2MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceProvides coding agents with pre-flight cost estimation by analyzing local logs to forecast token usage and quota impact before expensive work, exposing tools for remaining quota, per-task cost estimates, and attempt affordability.425MIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables analyzing coding-agent session transcripts to measure tool efficiency, detect loops, track test outcomes, and report costs, with MCP tools for listing sessions, analyzing sessions, finding loops, and generating cost reports.4MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceEnables AI agents to self-audit their token usage and costs, providing burn reports, forensics, and optimization recommendations via MCP.121MIT
TDQS
A3.9/5.0
Scored across 14 tools
Disambiguation4/5
Tools are mostly distinct: telemetry has two entry points (ami_collect_telemetry vs ami_record_calls) that could be confused, but descriptions clearly separate by runtime. Other tools target distinct actions (begin, mark, submit, status, etc.).
Naming Consistency4/5
All tools follow the 'ami_' prefix plus clear verb_noun pattern (e.g., ami_get_scorecard, ami_write_findings, ami_submit_survey). Minor deviation: ami_survey_begin uses noun_verb instead of strict verb_noun, but overall consistent.
Tool Count5/5
14 tools is well within the sweet spot for a domain as complex as survey instrumentation and reporting. Each tool serves a distinct lifecycle step (setup, telemetry, grading, submission, reporting), and none feel redundant.
Completeness4/5
The tool surface covers the full survey lifecycle: begin, collect telemetry, mark stages, get instructions/scale/survey, check status, write findings, submit, and retrieve reports/lists. Minor gap: no explicit tool for updating or amending a run after submission, but that is not core to the stated purpose.
Maintenance
ActivityMaintained
ResponsivenessNo issues