Spec Driven Development
MCP Server that facilitates spec-driven development workflows, not just Vibe Coding.
作者提供的说明(英文原文)
Verified statistical inference for AI agents: hypothesis tests, sequential testing, power.
这三项永远不会合并成一个分数:意见、测量和人气是不同的东西。
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。
你需要
你用的是哪个应用?
在上方选择你的应用。我们会记住它,下次按钮会显示“安装到 …”。
打开 Claude Desktop → Settings → Developer → Edit Config,把下面的内容粘贴到 claude_desktop_config.json
{
"mcpServers": {
"rigor": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"rigor-mcp"
]
}
}
}在终端中运行这条命令
claude mcp add rigor -- uvx rigor-mcp粘贴到项目中的 .cursor/mcp.json,或 ~/.cursor/mcp.json
{
"mcpServers": {
"rigor": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"rigor-mcp"
]
}
}
}浏览器会先询问是否打开应用,然后应用会显示设置并请你确认。密钥的值会留空,由你自己填写。
粘贴到项目中的 .vscode/mcp.json
{
"servers": {
"rigor": {
"type": "stdio",
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"rigor-mcp"
]
}
}
}浏览器会先询问是否打开应用,然后应用会显示设置并请你确认。密钥的值会留空,由你自己填写。
这个服务器在你的电脑上运行,而 ChatGPT 只能连接互联网上的服务器。请选择其他应用。
你的选择通过 Cookie 保存在这台设备上,无需账户。
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。
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7日
注册名称已通过 GitHub 账户 mrnh 验证,该账户拥有此仓库
我们还没有从 GitHub 读取这个仓库
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
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 1 项适用的基础检查中通过了 1 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–,最新版本(0.5.0)于2个月前进入注册中心。
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 Python (uv)。
同一分类中有:Spec Driven Development, Remote Desktop Commander, OpenTakeoff
同一分类中其他作者的服务器,按星标数排序。
如何看卡片:★ 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
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.
Construction takeoff for AI agents: load plans, set scale, measure, count, export with provenance.
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。
Verified statistical inference for AI agents.
LLMs are decent at reciting statistics but bad at *doing* it reliably — a t-statistic or a required sample size is a number recalled from training data, not computed and checked. rigor is the alternative: classical hypothesis testing (parametric and non-parametric), correlation and regression, effect sizes, power/sample-size calculation, multiple-comparisons correction, and always-valid sequential testing for results checked more than once before they're final, computed from scratch and returned as a cited, assumption- checked answer -- plus a decision helper for picking the right tool and a batch tool for running/correcting many comparisons at once, since "which test do I even use," "I forgot to correct for multiple comparisons," and "I peeked at the dashboard and stopped early" are their own common failure modes, distinct from getting a single formula wrong.
A concrete case where this matters. The one sample-size number everyone half-remembers is Cohen (1988)'s own worked example: d=0.5, alpha=.05, power=.80 -> n≈64 per group. It's in every textbook and slide deck, so it's also what gets pattern-matched to when a *similar*-looking question comes up. Ask instead for d=0.46, power=.85 -- a modest, realistic revision, not a trick:
$ rigor power ttest-2samp --effect-size 0.46 --power 0.85
Required n per group = 84.86 (round up: 85)
85, not "about 64" -- a third more participants to recruit than the half-remembered number suggests, from a question that *looks* like the famous one. The formula itself isn't hard (power.py runs the same bisection search either direction, in a few lines); the failure mode is that recalling a nearby-looking answer feels indistinguishable from computing the right one, right up until the number's wrong.
A second concrete case. An agent (or person) watching a live experiment's dashboard and checking the p-value every time new data comes in, stopping the moment it clears 0.05, is a textbook way to fool yourself -- and it's the default way anyone actually monitors a running experiment, fixed-sample design or not:
$ rigor sequential peeking-inflation --n-looks 10
Naive repeated peeking, 10 looks, nominal alpha=0.05 estimated true alpha = 0.1918 (+/- 0.0028 MC SE, 20000 trials)
Checking 10 times at a nominal 5% level is really running at closer to 19% -- roughly one in five "significant" results would be noise even with zero real effect. rigor sequential proportion / rigor sequential mean compute an *always-valid* p-value instead (mSPRT, Johari et al. 2017): checkable after every new observation with the false-positive rate actually staying at the nominal level, no pre-committed sample size and no correction for "how many times have I looked" required.
Built as an MCP server: a scan of the current MCP ecosystem (Context7 for coding docs, several physics/engineering/chemistry/geo servers, even Bentley's STAAD integration) found statistics/experimental design as one of the few common agent needs nobody had covered yet.
The statistics themselves (rigor/distributions.py, inference.py, nonparametric.py, correlation.py, regression.py, effect_size.py, power.py, corrections.py, plus the decision/batch helpers in advisor.py and batch.py) are pure standard library, no dependencies. The package as a whole does depend on the official mcp SDK, since the MCP server is a first-class part of what it ships, not an add-on -- see Install.
pip install rigor-mcp
(the PyPI distribution is rigor-mcp since plain rigor was already taken by an unrelated package; the importable package and the CLI command are both still just rigor.) This gets you both console commands, rigor (CLI) and rigor-mcp (MCP server) -- deliberately one install, no extras to get right, since uvx rigor-mcp (how most MCP clients would actually invoke this) has no way to request an extra.
TestResult: statistic, degrees of freedom, two-tailed p-value, a confidence interval, a citation, and assumption warnings (e.g. small-n normality reliance, low expected cell counts).TestResult.TestResult (H0: no association) with a confidence interval via the Fisher z-transform.recommend_test: a decision helper, not a statistic. Answer a few characteristics of the data/question (continuous/proportion/categorical/ordinal, how many groups, paired, small-or-skewed, association-not-difference, checked-repeatedly) and get back which tool to call, what to call instead if this test's assumptions look shaky, and what to run alongside it -- compiling the cross-references every other module's docstrings already carry into one callable answer, so an agent doesn't need to have already read all of them to find the relevant one. checked_repeatedly=True routes to a sequential_* tool where one exists (two independent groups, continuous or proportion), and otherwise says so explicitly rather than silently ignoring the flag.pairwise_group_comparisons: runs every pairwise comparison across 2+ groups (two_sample_t_test or mann_whitney_u, your choice) and applies Bonferroni/BH correction to the whole batch in one call, instead of the agent orchestrating k*(k-1)/2 separate calls plus a correction call by hand and risking forgetting the correction step. The natural follow-up one_way_anova/kruskal_wallis already recommend in their own docstrings once a result comes back significant.naive_peeking_inflation -- a seeded Monte Carlo demonstration of exactly the failure mode this exists to avoid. The always-valid guarantee itself (not just a single p-value's correctness) is checked by simulation in tests/test_sequential.py. One deliberately counterintuitive choice: complete separation at a small n (e.g. 0/5 vs. 5/5) reports *no* actionable evidence (p=1), not the maximal evidence a one-shot Fisher's exact test would call it -- because this test gets checked after every single observation, and small-n complete separation happens under the null purely by chance often enough (~40% at n=1 per arm) that treating it as proof would defeat the always-valid guarantee itself. Caught by the guarantee simulation during development, not by inspection.rigor.py at the repo root is a thin shim so python3 rigor.py ... also works from a plain checkout, without installing anything).CLI, once installed:
rigor ttest one-sample --data 5.1,4.9,5.3,5.0,4.8,5.2 --mu0 5.0
rigor corr pearson --x 1,2,3,4,5 --y 2,4,5,4,5 rigor regress --x 1,2,3,4,5 --y 3,5,7,9,11 rigor nonparam mann-whitney --a 1,2,3 --b 4,5,6 rigor power ttest-2samp --effect-size 0.5 --power 0.8 rigor recommend --outcome-type continuous --n-groups 3 # which test fits? rigor posthoc --groups "1,2,3|4,5,6|7,8,9" --labels A,B,C # pairwise + correction rigor mcnemar --table "794,86;150,570" # paired proportions, e.g. before/after rigor sequential proportion --successes1 55 --n1 500 --successes2 40 --n2 500 --tau 0.05
rigor sequential peeking-inflation --n-looks 10 # ...vs. naively checking 10 times rigor --help # full list of subcommands (ttest, ztest, chi2, fisher, mcnemar,
or straight from a checkout without installing anything:
python3 rigor.py ttest one-sample --data 5.1,4.9,5.3,5.0,4.8,5.2 --mu0 5.0
MCP server, over stdio (the transport local clients like Claude Code expect):
pip install rigor-mcp
rigor-mcp
or from a checkout: pip install mcp && python3 -m rigor.mcp_server.
Register it with Claude Code:
claude mcp add rigor -- rigor-mcp
(or, from a checkout: claude mcp add rigor -- python3 -m rigor.mcp_server, run from this repo's root or with an absolute module path). For interactive poking with the MCP Inspector, run it as a script rather than the installed command — which means the package root has to be put on the path by hand, since the Inspector imports the file directly:
pip install "mcp[cli]"
PYTHONPATH=. mcp dev rigor/mcp_server.py
cohens_d corre
只显示了开头部分;其余内容请在仓库中阅读