Spec Driven Development
MCP Server that facilitates spec-driven development workflows, not just Vibe Coding.
제작자가 쓴 설명(영어 원문)
Local MCP server for parametric price benchmarking in procurement and engineering.
이 세 가지는 절대 하나의 점수로 합치지 않아요. 의견, 측정, 인기는 서로 다른 것이니까요.
이 서버는 아직 쉬운 말로 된 요약을 쓰지 못했어요. 아래는 레지스트리에서 읽어 온 사실이에요.
쓰고 있는 AI 앱을 고른 다음 설정을 복사하세요.
제작자가 레지스트리에 설치 정보를 올리지 않았어요. 아래 제작자의 README를 확인하세요.
내 컴퓨터에서 실행돼요. 설치하면 AI 앱에 도구 목록이 나타나요.
누구나 볼 수 있는 정보를 점검했고, 코드는 읽지 않았어요. 해당하지 않는 항목은 개수에서 뺐어요. · 2026년 11월 7일 점검
레지스트리 이름이 GitHub 계정 ahmed-khalil-hafsi 기준으로 확인되었고, 이 계정이 저장소를 소유하고 있어요
아직 GitHub에서 이 저장소를 읽어 오지 않았어요
아직 GitHub에서 이 저장소를 읽어 오지 않았어요
내 컴퓨터에서 실행되는 서버라 인터넷 엔드포인트가 없어요
내 컴퓨터에서 실행되며, 대신 로컬 설정을 사용해요
내 컴퓨터에서 실행돼요. 도구 목록은 인터넷 엔드포인트가 있는 서버에서만 읽을 수 있어요
레지스트리에서 이 카테고리의 활성 서버 전체와 비교했어요. 스타는 게시자가 저장소를 소유한 경우에만 세요.
해당하는 기본 점검 1개 중 1개를 통과했어요. 코드는 읽지 않았어요. 키나 토큰을 넣기 전에 서버가 어떤 권한을 요구하는지 확인하고, 꼭 필요한 권한만 있는 키를 쓰세요.
레지스트리에 필수 키가 나와 있지 않아요. 다만 처음 쓸 때 로그인을 요구하는 서버도 있어요.
내 컴퓨터에서 실행돼요. AI 앱이 필요할 때 실행하고, 데이터는 제작자의 서버를 거치지 않아요(서버 자체가 온라인 서비스를 호출하는 경우는 제외).
GitHub 저장소는 마지막으로 – 변경됐고, 최신 버전(1.1.0)은 2개월 전 레지스트리에 올라왔어요.
Claude Desktop, Claude Code, Cursor, VS Code처럼 MCP를 지원하는 앱에서 쓸 수 있어요.
같은 카테고리에는: Spec Driven Development, Remote Desktop Commander, Excaliself
같은 카테고리에서 다른 제작자가 만든 서버예요. 스타 순으로 정렬했어요.
카드 보는 법:★ GitHub 스타i세 기둥: 리뷰 · 점검 · 사용 정도i업데이트 = 최신 버전을 레지스트리에 공개한 날i
MCP Server that facilitates spec-driven development workflows, not just Vibe Coding.
Remote Desktop Commander: use files, terminal and processes on your own computers from any AI app.
Find, read, create, edit, and organize Excalidraw drawings in your self-hosted Excaliself instance.
제작자의 저장소에서 쓰인 그대로 가져왔어요. PopNx MCP가 검토하거나 보증한 내용이 아니에요. HTML, 이미지, 스크립트는 제거했어요. 링크를 누르면 이 사이트를 벗어나요.
P2Predict turns your purchasing history into a price model your team can talk to. Ask what a part should cost, why, and how sure the answer is, in plain language, through the AI agent you already use.
Set up in one command:
pip install "p2predict[mcp]"
Built for procurement and engineering teams in automotive, semiconductors, electronics, industrials, pharma, and chemicals.
Most of what a part costs is decided upstream, in a design review procurement never sees. An engineer tightens a tolerance beyond what the application needs, or locks the part to a single supplier, and the cost rides downstream with no number attached. By the time the BOM reaches procurement, the expensive decisions are frozen and all that is left to negotiate is the rounding.
Then the quote arrives. The supplier knows their cost to the cent; you have last year's PO and a few days to respond. Multiply that across every line you buy and the leaks look the same everywhere: premiums no one benchmarked, specs no one costed, a number you cannot defend when finance asks where the savings went.
The answers are already in your purchase history. Nobody has had the time to dig them out.
P2Predict learns from your own purchasing data what drives the price of a part: supplier, material, size, spec, region. Then it gives your team a defensible target for any new or proposed part. Your category managers ask in plain English. The answer comes back grounded in what you have actually paid.
It runs on your machine, on your data, through any AI agent your team already uses. Nothing is uploaded. No vendor catalog, no cloud, no per-seat data-sharing.
P2Predict is parametric price prediction. It learns the fundamental pricing structure in your historical buying data and benchmarks any part against it, the ones you are about to buy and the ones you already do. Being precise about that is the whole point, so here is the honest scope.
What it does
What it does not do
This is where P2Predict earns its keep. Every one of these is a real question your team can now answer in seconds, with a number and the confidence behind it.
Your category manager drops the quote on the agent.
Category manager: *"Supplier quotes $14.20 for this part. What should it cost?"*
P2Predict: *"$12.40. Nine times in ten the real price lands between $10.80 and $13.90. This quote is running about 15% high."*
Your category manager now knows exactly where they can push back, with real data behind it.
This is where most negotiations stall. Now you have an answer. Ask for the breakdown.
Category manager: *"Why $12.40? Break it down."*
P2Predict: *"Supplier choice +$0.85, rush delivery +$1.20, tighter tolerance +$0.42, size +$0.40."*
Now you argue the components line by line: *"We agreed standard lead time. Take the $1.20 rush charge off and we're aligned."* A line item is hard to wave away.
Hold the spec fixed, swap the supplier, read the delta.
Category manager: *"What happens if we move this 16-cell pack monitor from Supplier A to Supplier B?"*
P2Predict: *"Down 37.7%, about $2.07 a unit, with the per-feature breakdown to back it up."*
More targeted RFQs, and a faster sourcing decision. That number is your lever in the room.
Engineering proposes a tighter tolerance. Before it gets locked in, price it.
Engineer: *"We want to go from ±0.1mm to ±0.05mm."*
Category manager to the agent: *"What does that do to cost?"*
P2Predict: *"+$0.42 a unit, +18%, likely range $0.30 to $0.55."*
Now the conversation is *"is 18% worth this requirement?"*, a priced trade-off the room can settle on numbers.
Walk in with every spec priced. Which features carry real cost, which premiums are negotiable, where the design is paying for something the application never uses. Backed by your own data, with a confidence level on every finding.
Drop the whole RFQ on the agent. Every line gets a target and a range. The eight to fifteen lines that fall outside their range are the ones worth a phone call. The rest are routine. Your team spends the afternoon on what actually moves the number.
Most tools hand you a number and walk away. P2Predict hands you the number and tells you how confident to be in it, per part, in dollars. That honesty is the whole point: a confident-but-wrong benchmark loses you credibility the moment a supplier checks it.
Three real parts, three different confidence ranges. The model is tight on the part it knows well and openly uncertain on the ones it doesn't. A narrow range means negotiate hard. A wide one means get a quote first. Your category manager always knows which.
Point P2Predict at a category and it shows you the levers. These charts come straight out of the Battery Management ICs case study, built on public catalog data anyone can reproduce.
Supplier choice is the biggest lever on the board. Same single-cell chip, identical spec, sorted by who makes it:
The premium supplier is priced at roughly four times the value option for the same part. That is a number you take into a negotiation, backed by your own data.
Every estimate breaks down spec by spec. Ask why a part is priced the way it is and you get the full breakdown:
Package size, supplier premium, multi-cell architecture: each one in dollars, each one adding up exactly to the predicted price. This is what lets your category manager say *"I know what I'm paying for, and here's the line I want to cut."*
Complexity is priced, not assumed. Every package pin on this same chip adds cost, monotonically, from $2.31 at 8 pins to $4.88 at 48 pins:
And on the 30 parts held back from training, entirely unseen by the model, predictions land within roughly 16% of the actual price half the time, and within 73% nine times in ten. That's the model showing its work on parts it never saw, not asking you to trust it blind.
You don't use P2Predict; your agent does. It speaks to any AI agent through a standard connector — Claude, GPT, or a local model — so your category managers never learn a new tool. They ask the assistant they already use, and it runs the analysis for them. This is agentic-first: there is no dashboard and no app, the interface is the agent you already have.
Under the hood, P2Predict is two layers. A math layer trains on your spend, predicts the price, attributes it spec by spec, and puts a calibrated range on every estimate — the defensible statistics. A judgment layer sits on top and steers the conversation: which analysis to run, when to stop and ask you for more data, and whether a result is solid enough to quote or needs a real RFQ first. It's what keeps a weaker agent from overstating a number it shouldn't.
Everything runs on your own machine. Your purchasing data is your most sensitive commercial asset, so P2Predict never uploads it and no third party trains on it. Pair it with a local model to keep the whole loop offline, or with a cloud agent if you prefer; either way your raw spend stays put, with no data-residency conversation to have with legal.
It complements should-cost tools, it does not replace them. Bottom-up should-costing builds a part up from material, labor, and machine time to estimate what it *should cost to make*. P2Predict does not do that and is not trying to. It answers the other question every category manager actually asks: *what has the market charged us for parts like this, and what should we expect to pay for the next one?*
Three worked case studies, each reproducible end to end on data anyone can download:
Each one leads with results, shows where to trust them, and points to exactly where every number comes from.
Is it really free? Yes — including for for-profit companies. Any organization can use P2Predict internally for its own operations, procurement, and benchmarking at no cost. No
앞부분만 보여 드려요. 나머지는 저장소에서 읽어 보세요