Puter MCP
Puter MCP enables AI tools to interact with Puter: manage files, websites, workers, and more
作者提供的说明(英文原文)
Deployment-readiness checks for document-QA and extraction AI: grounding, extraction, CI gate.
我们还没有为它写通俗的介绍。下面是我们从注册中心读取到的事实。
选择你使用的 AI 应用,然后复制设置。
通过 2/2 项检查 · 在你的电脑上运行
第一步:你用哪个 AI?
选择你用的应用,步骤会显示在下方。
可连接 Claude,但需要先准备
需要先在电脑上安装 Node.js(只需一次) · 仅限电脑上的 Claude 应用(Windows 或 Mac),网页和手机不可用
SettingsDeveloperEdit Config
{
"mcpServers": {
"groundwork": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"@pharmatools/groundwork",
"mcp"
]
}
}
}用 Groundwork 告诉我你能帮我做什么,然后做一件给我看✓ 如果 Claude 说正在使用 Groundwork,或回答中出现 Groundwork 的工具名称,就表示连接成功
菜单名称已于 2026年11月11日 对照 Anthropic 帮助页面核实 · 你的界面可能因版本略有不同
ChatGPT 暂时无法连接 Groundwork
Groundwork 需要安装在你的电脑上,而 ChatGPT 只能连接在网上运行的服务器
可连接 Claude Code,但需要先准备
需要先在电脑上安装 Node.js(只需一次)
Mac:按 Command+空格,输入 Terminal · Windows:打开 PowerShell
claude mcp add groundwork -- npx -y @pharmatools/groundwork mcp应能看到 Groundwork 在列表中并显示已连接
用 Groundwork 告诉我你能帮我做什么,然后做一件给我看✓ 如果 Claude Code 说正在使用 Groundwork,或回答中出现 Groundwork 的工具名称,就表示连接成功
菜单名称已于 2026年11月11日 对照 Anthropic 帮助页面核实 · 你的界面可能因版本略有不同
可连接 Cursor,但需要先准备
需要先在电脑上安装 Node.js(只需一次)
用 Groundwork 告诉我你能帮我做什么,然后做一件给我看✓ 如果 Cursor 说正在使用 Groundwork,或回答中出现 Groundwork 的工具名称,就表示连接成功
菜单名称已于 2026年11月11日 对照 Cursor 帮助页面核实 · 你的界面可能因版本略有不同
可连接 VS Code,但需要先准备
需要先在电脑上安装 Node.js(只需一次)
用 Groundwork 告诉我你能帮我做什么,然后做一件给我看✓ 如果 VS Code 说正在使用 Groundwork,或回答中出现 Groundwork 的工具名称,就表示连接成功
菜单名称已于 2026年11月11日 对照 VS Code 帮助页面核实 · 你的界面可能因版本略有不同
Claude Code
claude mcp add groundwork -- npx -y @pharmatools/groundwork mcpClaude Desktop (claude_desktop_config.json)
{
"mcpServers": {
"groundwork": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"@pharmatools/groundwork",
"mcp"
]
}
}
}Cursor (~/.cursor/mcp.json)
{
"mcpServers": {
"groundwork": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"@pharmatools/groundwork",
"mcp"
]
}
}
}VS Code (mcp.json)
{
"servers": {
"groundwork": {
"type": "stdio",
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"@pharmatools/groundwork",
"mcp"
]
}
}
}这些设置是根据作者在注册中心的条目生成的。如果 README 的写法不同,请以 README 为准。
依据这个服务器的连接方式和各应用自己的文档,检查于 2026年11月10日。
在你的电脑上运行,适用于
ClaudeGooseLM StudioMsty StudioCherry StudioCursorVS Code + GitHub CopilotVisual StudioWindsurf (Devin Desktop)ZedKiroClineContinueJetBrains AI AssistantClaude CodeCodex CLIGemini CLIOpenCodenodecodeWarpLibreChatRaycast
它在你的电脑上运行;安装后,工具列表会显示在你的 AI 应用中。
我们检查的是任何人都能看到的信息;我们没有阅读代码。不适用的检查项不计入总数。 · 检查于 2026年11月11日
注册名称已通过 GitHub 账户 nickjlamb 验证,该账户拥有此仓库
代码最后更新于前天
我们还没有从 GitHub 读取这个仓库
它在你的电脑上运行,没有互联网端点
在你的电脑上运行,改用本地设置
它在你的电脑上运行;我们只能读取互联网端点的工具列表
提问、分享技巧或报告无法使用。按“有帮助”数量排序。
还没有评价
与注册中心里这个分类中所有活跃的服务器比较。只有当发布者拥有该仓库时,星标数才计入。
它在 2 项适用的基础检查中通过了 2 项。我们没有阅读代码。在添加密钥或令牌之前,请先看看这个服务器要求哪些权限,并使用只具备所需权限的密钥。
注册中心没有列出必需的密钥,不过有些服务器会在首次使用时要求你登录。
它在你的电脑上运行。你的 AI 应用会在需要时启动它,数据不会经过作者的服务器(除非它自己调用在线服务)。
GitHub 仓库最后更新于前天,最新版本(0.4.1)于44天前进入注册中心。
支持 MCP 的应用,例如 Claude Desktop、Claude Code、Cursor 和 VS Code。你的电脑上还需要有 Node.js。
同一分类中有:Puter MCP, XcodeBuildMCP, XcodeBuildMCP
同一分类中其他作者的服务器,按星标数排序。
如何看卡片:↓ 每周下载量i★ GitHub 星标i三大支柱:评价 · 检查 · 使用情况i更新 = 最新版本发布到注册中心的时间i
Puter MCP enables AI tools to interact with Puter: manage files, websites, workers, and more
XcodeBuildMCP provides tools for Xcode project management, simulator management, and app utilities.
XcodeBuildMCP provides tools for Xcode project management, simulator management, and app utilities.
按原文从作者的仓库复制。PopNx MCP 没有审查或背书其内容。HTML、图片和脚本已被移除。链接会离开本站。
Deployment-readiness harnesses for AI deployment patterns.
Redaction · evals from your real failures · a CI gate that fails fabrication
Website · Getting started · Examples · Roadmap · Contributing · Changelog
You have a prototype: your documents, a model, useful output. What you don't have is the apparatus that makes it responsible to ship — a privacy pre-step, an evaluation built from your own failures, and a gate that stops a quiet prompt tweak from deploying a system that fabricates. That apparatus usually requires an ML engineer. Groundwork scaffolds it instead.
Groundwork's units are deployment patterns, not products — think Terraform modules for trustworthy AI deployments. groundwork init scaffolds the whole harness for a pattern:
| Archetype | The pattern | Status |
|---|---|---|
document-qa | documents → retrieval → grounded answers → human review | ✅ shipped |
extraction | documents → structured fields → schema validation → human review | ✅ shipped |
| research synthesis | questions → evidence → synthesis → human review | planned — see the roadmap |
Every check is deterministic: same inputs, same result, every time — no LLM judge, and no API key for the checks themselves.
git clone https://github.com/nickjlamb/groundwork.git && cd groundwork
npm install && npm run build npm run demo # document QA: the whole loop passes, fully offline npm run demo:break # the system starts fabricating — watch the gate go red
✗ GROUNDING demo-savings: ungrounded number "14" — not in the provided context ✗ GROUNDING demo-unanswerable-appeals: unanswerable question — the answer did not abstain
The same loop for structured extraction:
npm run demo:extraction # documents → fields, every check green
npm run demo:extraction:break # a guessed date of birth, a dropped field — red, by name
✗ EXTRACTION demo-referral: SCHEMA: /referral_date must be string ✗ EXTRACTION demo-referral: FABRICATED field "date_of_birth": document does not state it (got "12 April 1988")
That red build is the product: a fabricated figure, a guessed field, or a failed abstention becomes a CI failure, not a user complaint.
Ready for your own system?
npm install -D @pharmatools/groundwork
npx groundwork init # document QA npx groundwork init extraction # structured extraction
| You edit | Groundwork runs | The gate enforces |
|---|---|---|
adapter.mjs — one file: answer() for document QA, extract() for extraction | Redaction pre-step (Redacta) — identifiers become labelled tokens locally, before anything is sent | check --baseline freezes a good run as the floor |
datasets/cases/*.json — gold cases from real questions and real documents, labelled by hand | The archetype's eval (OpenGATE) — document QA: anchored facts · numbers trace to context · abstention. Extraction: schema validity · field accuracy vs gold · no fabricated fields | check --ci in the scaffolded GitHub Action fails any PR below it |
groundwork.config.json — archetype, redaction, eval, and gate settings | Cost profiling — measured token usage, savings in leverage order (caching → batching → trimming → routing) | A human still reviews high-stakes outputs — the gate is a floor, not a certification |
For extraction, one schema choice does most of the safety work: nullability is the abstention contract. A field the system must always find is non-nullable; a field the document may not state is nullable, and the system returns null for it — unknown → null, never guessed. A guessed value in a null-gold field fails by name: FABRICATED field "date_of_birth": document does not state it.
| Example | What it shows | Run |
|---|---|---|
demo/ | Document QA: the full loop on a tiny local system — and the gate catching fabrication by name. Zero network. | npm run demo / npm run demo:break |
demo-extraction/ | Structured extraction: schema validation, field accuracy, and the gate naming a guessed date of birth and a dropped required field. Zero network. | npm run demo:extraction / npm run demo:extraction:break |
examples/claude-doc-qa/ | A real Claude-backed system: answer-from-document-only prompting, prompt caching, key-gated evals, measured usage feeding groundwork cost — plus a mock API so the whole loop runs offline in CI. | npm run example:mock (offline) / npm run example:check (live) |
examples/claude-extraction/ | Claude filling a schema from fictional referral letters: unknown → null in the prompt contract, the schema as the cached prefix, and the gate catching a guessed date of birth — plus a mock API for offline CI. | npm run example:extraction:mock (offline) / npm run example:extraction:check (live) |
groundwork init [archetype] scaffold the harness for a pattern (document-qa, extraction)
groundwork check redaction self-test + the archetype's eval groundwork check --baseline freeze this run as the regression floor groundwork check --ci exit non-zero on failure or regression vs baseline groundwork cost measured token usage + savings, in leverage order
Two ways to learn it: docs/GETTING-STARTED.md is the reference walkthrough (about half an hour), and the course covers the same ground as checkpoint-driven lessons — including the sabotage test, where you deliberately break your own system to prove the gate catches it, and a lesson on the extraction archetype. The scaffolded playbook (GROUNDWORK.md) lives inside your repo, where your team will actually read it.
The same checks ship as an MCP server (groundwork-mcp, stdio) so Claude Code, Cowork, or Claude Desktop can run them conversationally — check_readiness on a repo, check_answer_grounding on a single answer, check_extraction on a single record (no repo needed), scaffold_harness, cost_summary:
{ "mcpServers": { "groundwork": { "command": "npx", "args": ["-y", "@pharmatools/groundwork", "mcp"] } } }
There's also an Agent Skill (skills/groundwork-readiness/) that teaches an agent to run the gate and report results honestly — including refusing to present a green check as a safety certification.
Groundwork is a strong floor, not a guarantee. Deterministic checks catch the failures that can be caught deterministically; they cannot certify an AI system safe. For high-stakes outputs — anything touching health, money, legal standing, or safety — a human must review before the output reaches the person it affects. Extraction raises the stakes quietly: the record feeds decisions, so a wrong field is a wrong decision. The scaffolded playbook says this too, on purpose.
MIT. Everything init scaffolds into your repo is MIT-0 — yours, no attribution needed.