Skip to main content
Glama
thedv91

jev-agent-mcp

by thedv91
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Related Servers

Alternatives to jev-agent-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • Jev MCP

      chungsubeen0
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables 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.
      7
      MIT

    • jev-mcp

      minhgv
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Provides coding agents and CI with a typed decision layer that sends bounded state and questions to Jev, then returns deterministic actions for review, risk assessment, requirement checks, and verification.
      9
      MIT

    • jev-flash-router

      Ravinder82
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI coding agents to make fast, zero-output-token decisions by evaluating context, diffs, logs, or options through the OpenRouter Decisions API using TypeSafe Jev, returning calibrated probabilities for binary, categorical, or scoring questions.
      1
      136 npm
      2
      MIT

    • Jev MCP Proxy

      altregubov
      A
      license
      B
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI agent skills to route state-evaluation requests to TypeSafe AI's Jev System One model, supporting typed questions, choice classification, binary probabilities, and rubric scoring with calibrated confidence.
      4
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    A4.6/5.0

    Scored across 5 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    The tools are generally distinct: review_files vs review_changes differ by input type (files vs diff), and judge/rank_candidates/verify_claim have clear use cases. However, review_files and review_changes could be confused by an agent scanning quickly, and judge with a choice question overlaps with rank_candidates for single-dimension ranking.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    All tool names follow a clear verb_noun pattern (review_files, review_changes, verify_claim, rank_candidates, judge). The pattern is consistent, though 'judge' is a single verb without a noun, which is a minor deviation from the otherwise consistent scheme.

    Tool Count5/5

    With 5 tools, the server is tightly scoped around the Jev review workflow: two review modes (files/changes), a verification tool, and two decision-support tools (judge, rank_candidates). Each tool has a distinct role and no redundancy; the count is ideal for this purpose.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool surface covers the core review lifecycle: review current code, review changes, verify claims, and make decisions. A minor gap is the lack of a tool to aggregate or compare multiple review results, but agents can work around that by calling review tools separately.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources