AI Slop Checker

io.github.parweb由 GitHub 账号 parweb 发布v1.0.2更新于 Oct 24, 2026

Deterministic offline scorer for AI-writing tells in text and landing copy.

已验证STDIO仅桌面开发者工具数据与分析

概览

AI 生成的概览

离线、确定性的 MCP 服务器,为文本和落地页文案打出 AI 写作痕迹评分,并给出计数与具体修改建议。

可以做什么
  • 按六个维度给散文打 0-100 分(LLM 用词密度、破折号密度、套路结构、句子节奏、具体性、列表完美度),并标出问题与修改建议
  • 给落地页主视觉区块(标题、可选副标题与行动按钮)按反夸张、具体性、清晰度、标题形态和 CTA 打 0-100 分
  • 返回 239 个真实落地页语料库的基准统计,包括中位分与各痕迹出现频率
  • 给出每个子分数背后的原始计数,便于助手针对某一项修改后重新评分
适用场景
适合助手起草或修改文章、营销文案时,需要一个可重复、可解释的文风检查,而不是猜测作者身份。也适合放进测试,因为相同输入总是得到相同分数。
运行要求
以 stdio 在本地运行,需要 Node.js 18 或更高版本。可通过 npx 从 GitHub 规格安装,或使用自包含的 MCPB 包(建议 v1.0.2)。无需 API 密钥、账号、网络访问或环境变量。
安装前请注意
分数衡量的是文风而非作者身份:低分只表示读起来泛泛,并不代表由机器生成,专业文案也可能得低分。词表带有主观倾向且仅支持英文。较早的 v1.0.0 和 v1.0.1 包附带过时的基准数字和评分规则。

安装

在 SourceWeft 中

  1. 打开 控制台中的 AI Slop Checker,将其添加到工作区。
  2. 为需要使用其工具的对话启用该服务。

Desktop only,通过 STDIO。 STDIO 服务会启动本地进程,因此需要 SourceWeft 桌面宿主。

其他 MCP 客户端

参照 仓库 中的启动说明。

README

mcp-ai-slop-checker

An MCP server that tells your model when its own writing sounds like AI.

[MCP Registry] [test] [license]

bash
claude mcp add ai-slop-checker -- npx -y github:parweb/mcp-ai-slop-checker

Three tools, all deterministic, local and offline: no LLM call, no API key, no network request, no telemetry. The same input always returns the same number, so you can put a score in a test and assert on it.

check_ai_slop(text)                          -> 0-100, 6 dimensions, named tells, fixesgrade_landing_copy(headline, subhead, cta)   -> 0-100, 5 dimensions, flags, rewritesget_slop_stats()                             -> benchmark stats from 239 real landing pages

Why

Every "AI detector" is a probabilistic classifier that guesses at authorship and gets it wrong on both sides. This does the opposite and says so plainly: it counts style tells — em-dash density, delve/tapestry/furthermore frequency, "not only… but also" scaffolds, suspiciously even sentence lengths, missing specifics, over-parallel bullet lists — and hands back the raw counts that produced each sub-score.

That makes it useful in a loop an agent can actually close: write → score → see which count is high → fix that specific thing → re-score. A classifier's "87% likely AI" gives an agent nothing to act on. "hype": 5 does.

A score is a style measurement, not an authorship claim. stripe.com scores 61 and was obviously written by professionals. Low score means reads generic, never was generated.

Install

Listed in the official MCP Registry as io.github.parweb/ai-slop-checker.

Installs straight from GitHub — not on npm yet, so use the github: spec:

bash
claude mcp add ai-slop-checker -- npx -y github:parweb/mcp-ai-slop-checker

Or in any MCP client config (claude_desktop_config.json, .mcp.json, Cursor, etc.):

json
{  "mcpServers": {    "ai-slop-checker": {      "command": "npx",      "args": ["-y", "github:parweb/mcp-ai-slop-checker"]    }  }}

Or install the self-contained MCPB bundle (dependencies included, no install step) from the v1.0.2 release — mcp-ai-slop-checker.mcpb, SHA-256 6b13eb6d19be99553ab4551c7b6f9fc159a0db854c20718c611bfa0cc30f43f8. Rebuild it yourself and compare: ./scripts/build-mcpb.sh.

From source:

bash
git clone https://github.com/parweb/mcp-ai-slop-checkercd mcp-ai-slop-checker && npm install && npm test# then point your client at:  node /abs/path/mcp-ai-slop-checker/src/index.js

Node >= 18. One runtime dependency (@modelcontextprotocol/sdk) plus zod.

Tools

check_ai_slop(text)

Scores prose 0-100, where 100 reads human. Six dimensions: LLM-word density (30), em-dash density (20), formulaic structures (15), sentence rhythm (15), specificity (10), list perfection (10). ~200+ characters gives a reliable read.

Real output, trimmed to the parts that matter:

jsonc
// input: a 74-word paragraph of "In today's fast-paced world… delve… Moreover… seamless…"{  "score": 34,  "verdict": "This sounds AI-generated.",  "words": 74,  "dimensions": [    { "key": "LLM-word density",     "max": 30, "score": 0,  "notes": { "phrases": 5, "words": 14 } },    { "key": "Em-dash density",      "max": 20, "score": 8,  "notes": { "dashes": 1 } },    { "key": "Formulaic structures", "max": 15, "score": 10, "notes": { "hits": 1, "triads": 1 } },    { "key": "Sentence rhythm",      "max": 15, "score": 6,  "notes": { "sentences": 5, "cv": 0.2 } },    { "key": "Specificity",          "max": 10, "score": 0,  "notes": { "number": false, "propers": 0 } },    { "key": "List perfection",      "max": 10, "score": 10, "notes": { "bullets": 0, "bold": 0 } }  ],  "flags": ["llmwords", "emdash", "formulaic", "uniform", "nospec"],  "fixes": [    { "title": "Cut the LLM words",      "detail": "Found 19 (\"delve/tapestry/furthermore/it's important to note\"…). Each one is a known model tell. Replace with the plain word you'd say out loud." },    { "title": "Vary sentence length",      "detail": "Your sentences are suspiciously even (5 sentences, low variance). Humans write long, then short. Like this." }  ]}

The hand-written paragraph in test/engine.test.js — same subject, same rough length — scores 92, "Reads human."

grade_landing_copy(headline, subhead, cta)

Scores a hero block 0-100 across Anti-hype (25), Specificity (25), Clarity (25), Headline shape (13), CTA (12). subhead and cta are optional, but an empty CTA scores 0 on that dimension.

Three exclusions are worth knowing, because each one was a measured false positive rather than a preference: a digit that is part of a name, a version, a year or a list index is not a quantified claim (Auth0, Framer 3.0, B2C, © 2026); an arrow or a check mark is not an emoji (Get started → was losing 4 points for a button glyph); and an acronym is not shouting — SQL, MCP, CLI, API no longer count as ALL-CAPS. Byte-for-byte the same rules as the browser grader in parweb/landing-copy-grader and the live one; verified identical on all 239 corpus pages.

Real output:

jsonc
// headline: "Revolutionize your workflow with our seamless, cutting-edge platform"// subhead:  "Unlock powerful solutions that transform your business"// cta:      "Learn more"{  "score": 32,  "verdict": "This reads AI-generated.",  "dimensions": [    { "key": "Anti-hype",      "max": 25, "score": 0,  "notes": { "hype": 5, "exclamations": 0, "emoji": 0, "allcaps": 0 } },    { "key": "Specificity",    "max": 25, "score": 8,  "notes": { "number": false } },    { "key": "Clarity",        "max": 25, "score": 7,  "notes": { "filler": 3 } },    { "key": "Headline shape", "max": 13, "score": 13, "notes": { "words": 8 } },    { "key": "CTA",            "max": 12, "score": 4,  "notes": { "weak": true, "empty": false } }  ],  "flags": ["hype", "filler", "weakcta", "nonum"],  "fixes": [    { "title": "Cut the hype words", "detail": "Found 5 (\"revolutionize/unlock/seamless/leverage\"…). Replace each with a plain, concrete verb." },    { "title": "Add one number",     "detail": "No concrete figure anywhere. …82% of the 239 pages in our dataset fail this one." },    { "title": "Rewrite the CTA",    "detail": "\"Learn more\" is generic. Use an action + outcome…" }  ]}

Fix all four and the same offer scores 100:

headline: "Cut invoice time from 3 days to 20 minutes"subhead:  "Turn your spreadsheet into a client-ready invoice, no template hunting."cta:      "Start your first invoice"-> { "score": 100, "verdict": "Reads human & sharp.", "flags": [] }

Both numbers are asserted in test/engine.test.js, so they can't silently drift.

get_slop_stats()

Without a baseline, "your copy scored 74" is meaningless. This returns the reference distribution so the model can say "that's below the median of 239 real landing pages."

These are the figures of the deposited corpus, scored with static-fetch-regex-v1. Three rules were tightened on 2026-07-25 — a digit inside a name/version/year is not a claim, an arrow is not an emoji, an acronym is not shouting — and grade_landing_copy applies them, so a page re-scored today can differ from its row in this table. The corpus deliberately keeps its original scoring: it is an archived object with a DOI, not a live view.

pages239 (303 attempted, 64 excluded)
scoremin 41 · median 79 · mean 80.1 · 19 perfect · 31 below 70
extracted2026-07-24, raw HTML, no JS execution, no LLM

How often each tell fires:

flagpages%meaning
nonum19582%not a single digit in the hero
filler8234%≥1 filler word
weakcta3515%CTA is a stock verb phrase
caps3314%ALL-CAPS word in headline/sub
hype167%≥1 hype word
shorthl135%headline under 3 words
longhl94%headline over 12 words
excl73%exclamation mark
emoji73%emoji in the hero

The most common tell is not the em-dash and not "delve" — it's the absence of a number. Four landing pages in five make a claim with zero quantity attached to it.

Full CSV with the extracted hero text of every page, methodology and the exclusion list: landing-copy-grader/data/landing-pages-scores.csv. node scripts/verify-dataset.js in that repo re-scores all 239 rows offline and fails on any disagreement — the table above is pinned to its output by test/engine.test.js.

Correction, 2026-07-25. These counts were wrong in v1.0.0 and are fixed on main. The CSV they were computed from stored only the first three flags per row, so every page with four or more tells lost one: nonum read 194 / 81% instead of 195 / 82%, and caps, shorthl, longhl and emoji were low too. Scores, median, mean and the perfect-100 list were never affected. If you saw 194 / 81% from us anywhere, 195 / 82% is the correct figure.

Tests

bash
npm test

18 tests: the scoring engines against published fixtures, plus 6 that spawn the real server over stdio and drive it through an actual MCP client (listTools, three callTool round-trips, optional-argument handling, and a validation error that must not kill the process).

# tests 18# pass 18# fail 0

Related

Same engines, other surfaces:

Project status

First published 2026-07-25. Small and young — stated plainly so you can judge it.

  • Stable: the three tool signatures, the JSON shape they return, and the two scoring engines. Their outputs are asserted in the test suite, so a change that moves a score fails CI rather than surprising you.
  • Opinionated and expected to change: the word lists. English only.
  • Known gap: the v1.0.0 bundle ships wrong benchmark numbers and v1.0.0/v1.0.1 both ship the pre-correction scoring rules. Use v1.0.2, or the npx github: install, which tracks main.

Issues and PRs welcome, particularly on the word lists — "this term is wrong, here's a counter-example" is a reproducible bug report against a deterministic scorer, which is most of the point of building it this way.

Honesty notes

  • This counts style tells. It does not detect authorship, and nothing reliably does.
  • The word lists are opinionated and English-only. They are plain arrays at the top of src/slop.js and src/copy.js — read them, disagree, fork.
  • Scores are comparable over time only because nothing here is stochastic. That's the whole point.
  • Built and maintained by an autonomous agent org. The code, the dataset and these numbers are real and reproducible; run npm test and check.

License

MIT

来源:README.md,提交 4fcfe60

工具

0
SourceWeft 尚未在沙箱中启动过该软件包,因此其工具未知。

版本历史

1
  1. v1.0.2最新Sep 16, 2026

评分

已满足适用检查项的 50%

该评分衡量此收录条目的完整程度,依据注册中心条目、端点与公开来源计算得出。它不是对服务器本身的评价,也不表示服务器安全或当前可用:可连通性是带日期的检查结果,评分也不包含安装量或用户评价。

  • 近 30 天内可连通25 分

    请保持端点能够响应 MCP 握手;SourceWeft 每 30 天探测一次。

  • 已声明认证方式10 分

    请在注册中心条目中声明凭据请求头,或保持端点能够响应探测,以便判定其认证方式。

  • 已列出工具15 分

    请让服务器在无凭据时响应 tools/list,或发布可在沙箱中无凭据启动的软件包。

  • 描述必需15 分
  • 图标10 分
  • 文档15 分
  • 许可证10 分