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)
Wraps the slop-eval CLI as a single generic MCP tool for genericness scoring of AI UI output.
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": {
"slop-eval": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"slop-eval-cli",
"slop-eval-mcp"
]
}
}
}在终端中运行这条命令
claude mcp add slop-eval -- uvx slop-eval-cli slop-eval-mcp粘贴到项目中的 .cursor/mcp.json,或 ~/.cursor/mcp.json
{
"mcpServers": {
"slop-eval": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"slop-eval-cli",
"slop-eval-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": {
"slop-eval": {
"type": "stdio",
"command": "uvx",
"args": [
"slop-eval-cli",
"slop-eval-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 RudrenduPaul 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(0.1.4)于3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, Foliosio
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.
Read your support inbox, tag conversations and save draft replies from your AI agent. Never sends.
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。
Quickstart • CLI reference • Library API • MCP Server • Comparison • FAQ
Score AI-generated UI for genericness with an LLM judge, so a CI check catches the same "this looks like every other AI-built app" problem a human reviewer would flag on sight.
npx slop-eval-cli score --screenshot ./preview.png --json
No install step: npx fetches and runs the published npm package directly. Prefer Python? pip install slop-eval-cli gets you the same CLI as a genuine, independent port of the scoring logic.
slop-eval-cli is live on both npm and PyPI (package slop_eval). The Python port is a genuine, independent implementation, built and tested (60/60 tests, verified in this pass) against the same rubric and Anthropic judge prompt as the TypeScript original. See python/README.md for Python-specific usage.
Nutlope's Hallmark, a popular AI design skill with 21,000+ stars, has an open issue where a user says flatly: "all of it looks like slop." The maintainer closed it NOT_PLANNED. Separately, a contributor opened a PR against Hallmark titled "Add eval-driven quality harness for Hallmark outputs" that has sat open and unmerged for about two months as of this writing. Both are real and dated as of this writing. Neither proves the demand is large, only that the gap is real and currently unaddressed.
slop-eval is not the first tool in this space, and it doesn't try to be. Two real, free tools already sit nearby:
impeccable critique command adds further, opt-in LLM-based judgments on top. Core detection stays fast because it doesn't need a model for any of its default checks. It has grown well beyond a slop detector into a full design-language skill for Claude Code, Cursor, and Codex, with 23 commands total.Neither does holistic, judgment-based UI scoring: "does this layout feel novel," "does this component choice feel considered," the kind of read a fixed rule can't easily encode. That's the gap slop-eval fills, built to compose with tools like Impeccable's rather than replace them.
Verified directly against the code in this repo:
src/rubric/v1.json scores layout novelty, visual-identity distinctiveness, and component-pattern novelty, 0-10 each. A finding with no specific citation is treated as a bug, not a valid score (see src/sources/RuleSource.ts).LLMJudgeSource calls the Anthropic API with tool_choice locked to a submit_slop_scores schema: the response comes back as reliably structured JSON instead of a chat reply that has to be regexed apart.{ target, rubric, compositeScore, findings[], summary, disclaimer } object on stdout, on both success and error paths, so a script or agent never has to branch on shape to find an error string.0 success (no threshold, or score at/above --fail-below), 1 success but below threshold, 2 usage error or unrecoverable failure. Verified directly against the built CLI and the real npm/PyPI packages this session; see CLI reference.src/cache/judge-cache.ts hashes the input bytes and skips the API call entirely on a repeat run against unchanged input. That's a correctness guarantee as much as a cost saver: an unchanged PR can't flap a CI gate from LLM run-to-run variance.src/sources/RuleSource.ts is the boundary every scoring source implements. Today that's one real source (LLMJudgeSource) and one documented stub (ScreenshotDiffSource, honestly reported as not_scored until a real labeled corpus exists), so a future rule catalog or a second LLM provider slots in without touching the composite scorer.--screenshot sends the actual rendered image to the judge. --url is a documented v0.1 limitation: no bundled headless browser, so it fetches raw HTML/text and the judge reasons over markup and copy instead of layout.action/action.yml posts a PR comment headed by the single most specific flagged finding, followed by the composite score, giving a reviewer the reasoning behind the number.v1 today) that produced it. Rubric changes ship as a new file, never a silent edit to an existing one.score_composite and friends in Python, runScore/scoreComposite in TypeScript) so an agent framework can call slop-eval in-process instead of shelling out. See Library API.Requires Node.js 18+ (npm) or Python 3.9+ (PyPI), and an ANTHROPIC_API_KEY (BYO key; get one at console.anthropic.com).
The fastest path, no local clone or build needed, is the one-liner at the top of this README:
npx slop-eval-cli score --screenshot ./preview.png --json
Verified this session against the real published npm package, with a real PNG at ./preview.png and no ANTHROPIC_API_KEY set:
$ npx --yes slop-eval-cli@latest score --screenshot ./preview.png --json
{ "error": "ANTHROPIC_API_KEY environment variable is not set.\nslop-eval calls the Anthropic API to run the LLM judge, and is BYO-key (bring your own key) -- there is no default or shared key baked into this tool. Set your key and try again:\n\n export ANTHROPIC_API_KEY=\"sk-ant-...\"\n\nGet a key at https://console.anthropic.com/" }
To build from source instead:
git clone https://github.com/RudrenduPaul/slop-eval.git
cd slop-eval npm install npm run build
export ANTHROPIC_API_KEY="sk-ant-..." ./dist/cli.js score --screenshot ./test/fixtures/sample.png
For CI or agent consumption, add --json. --json always emits a valid JSON object on stdout, on both the success and error paths, and the --url/--screenshot mutual-exclusivity check is a good example of a real usage-error path you can rely on being parseable:
./dist/cli.js score --screenshot ./test/fixtures/sample.png --json
{
"target": "./test/fixtures/sample.png", "rubric": "v1", "compositeScore": 62, "findings": [ { "ruleId": "llm-judge.layout-novelty", "category": "Layout novelty", "score": 4, "evidence": "Matches a common hero + 3-card grid + footer CTA pattern.", "status": "flag" } ], "summary": { "pass": 1, "flagged": 1, "notScored": 1 }, "disclaimer": "This score is a heuristic quality signal from an LLM judge, not a certification..." }
Captured directly from ./dist/cli.js score --help on the built CLI this session, word for word:
Usage: slop-eval score [options]
Score a URL or screenshot for AI-UI genericness against a versioned rubric.
Note on --url mode (v0.1 limitation): this tool does not bundle a headless browser. If --url is given, the raw HTML/text response is fetched and given to the judge as a fallback input, instead of a rendered screenshot -- the judge can reason about markup and copy, but not the actual visual layout. For the stronger, layout-aware signal, render the page yourself and pass --screenshot.
Options: --url URL to score (fetched as raw HTML/text -- see limitation note above) --screenshot path to a screenshot image to score (preferred over --url) --rubric rubric version to use, reads src/rubric/ .json (default: "v1") --json output structured JSON instead of a human-readable report (default: false) --fail-below exit code 1 if the composite score is below this threshold (0-100); no threshold by default -h, --help display help for command
Exit codes: 0 success (no threshold, or score at/above --fail-below), 1 success but below threshold, 2 usage error or unrecoverable failure (missing API key, unreadable file, malformed rubric, mutually exclusive --url/--screenshot).
--url and --screenshot are mutually exclusive; passing both or neither is a usage error (exit 2) in either output mode. Both verified directly against the built CLI this session.
[!NOTE]
--urlis a v0.1 limitation, by design: no bundled headless browser. It fetches raw HTML/text and hands it to the judge as a text fallback, reasoning over markup and copy rather than the rendered layout.--screenshotis the stronger signal; render the page yourself (Playwright, Puppeteer, or your CI's existing preview-screenshot step) and pass the image.
The Python CLI (slop-eval console script, installed via pip install slop-eval-cli) exposes the identical flag set and exit-code contract, confirmed against its own --help output this session.
Both distributions export a real, documented programmatic entry point in addition to the CLI. This is the interface an agent framework or CI script calls in-process instead of shelling out.
Python (slop_eval/__init__.py):
from slop_eval import score_composite, ScoreInput, LLMJudgeSource, ScreenshotDiffSource
sources = [LLMJudgeSource("v1"), ScreenshotDiffSource()] result = score_composite(sources, ScoreInput(screenshot_path="./preview.png")) print(result.composite_score, result.findings)
`score_composite(sources: List[RuleSource], scor
只显示了开头部分;其余内容请在仓库中阅读