mcp-verify
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| MCP_VERIFY_MODE | No | Override mode selection: 'api' or 'sampling'. Default is 'sampling' if ANTHROPIC_API_KEY is not set. | |
| ANTHROPIC_API_KEY | No | API key for Anthropic. Required for 'api' mode; if not provided, the server uses sampling mode by default. |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| prompts | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| resources | {
"subscribe": false,
"listChanged": false
} |
| experimental | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| verifyA | Check a DRAFT text against a SOURCE (the source of truth) and report every factual claim the source does not support. Args: source: The trusted reference text — the source of truth to check against. draft: The text to verify (e.g. a summary, answer, or generated document). Returns a JSON string: {"passed": bool, "failures": [{"claim", "reason", "source_fact_checked", "category", "severity"}], "mode": "api"|"sampling"}. passed is true only when no unsupported claims were found. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
With only one tool, there is no risk of ambiguity or confusion between tools. The 'verify' tool has a clear, singular purpose.
A single tool cannot have naming inconsistencies. The name 'verify' is a clear verb that directly describes its action.
The single tool is at the low end of the typical range. While the server is highly focused, a single tool feels thin for a standalone server, as users might expect additional related functionality.
The server provides a single verification operation, which is complete for that narrow task, but lacks any supporting tools (e.g., source management, draft editing) that would make it a comprehensive verification service.