com.woodstitch/tts-human-eval
OfficialRelated Servers
Alternatives to com.woodstitch/tts-human-eval
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables agents to generate TTS audio, verify it with independent ASR, measure quality against gates, escalate retries, and receive structured QC reports to improve text.1MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables assistants to queue and monitor local language and vision model evaluations, compare results with confidence intervals, and retrieve routing recommendations for task categories.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI assistants to obtain calibrated probabilities, option picks, scale scores, and multi-question judgments for batches of short text, returning numeric results for sorting, filtering, and counting.MIT

audio.ditto/ttsofficial
FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI clients to browse voices and languages and synthesize text into downloadable audio links, including batch jobs of up to 1,000 texts.1-
Pebbler MCPofficial
AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables agents to run image A/B preference tests with human participants, retrieve live pricing and availability, create and purchase studies within configured USDC spending limits, and check vote results.743 npmMIT- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceReal human judgment as agent tools -- an AI agent can ask a question and get back a structured, schema-validated JSON answer from a real quality-scored human. 16 response types (yes/no, ratings, rankings, A/B tests, sentiment, image/video/audio review, voice/video/photo capture). Fully programmatic signup with a $5 free trial credit, no card required.766 npmMIT
TDQS
Scored across 13 tools
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action: informational lookups (templates, pricing), file management (upload/list/delete), and a clearly separated eval lifecycle (create/start/get/results/export/cancel). The potentially confusable pairs are explicitly differentiated — create_eval only prices while start_eval spends money, and get_eval returns live progress while get_results returns final metrics.
All names share the woodstitch_ prefix and are snake_case, with verb_noun patterns for the operations (list_evals, upload_files, create_eval, cancel_eval). The three informational tools (templates, pricing, account) are bare nouns rather than verb_noun, which is a minor but sensible deviation since they take no action.
Thirteen tools is well within the sweet spot and every tool maps to a real step in the workflow: learn the product, upload clips, price, start, monitor, collect results, export, cancel. Nothing looks redundant or padded.
The full lifecycle is covered — discovery, file CRUD, quoting, starting, polling, results, export, cancellation, and account balance — with no obvious dead ends. Minor gaps remain, such as no way to delete an eval record or re-inspect a stored eval's compiled design after creation (only re-pricing via dry_run).