AI Slop Checker

io.github.parweb由 GitHub 帳號 parweb 發布v1.0.2更新於 Oct 24, 2026

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

已驗證STDIO僅桌面開發者工具資料與分析

概覽

AI 產生的概覽

離線、確定性的 MCP 伺服器,為文字與著陸頁文案評分 AI 寫作痕跡,並回傳計數與具體修改建議。

可以做什麼
  • 依六個面向為文章打 0-100 分(LLM 用詞密度、破折號密度、套路結構、句子節奏、具體性、清單完美度),並標出問題與修改建議
  • 為著陸頁主視覺區塊(標題、選填副標與行動按鈕)依反誇飾、具體性、清晰度、標題形態與 CTA 打 0-100 分
  • 回傳 239 個真實著陸頁語料庫的基準統計,包括中位分數與各項痕跡出現頻率
  • 提供每個子分數背後的原始計數,讓助理能針對單一項目修改後重新評分
適用情境
適合助理撰寫或修改文章、行銷文案時,需要可重現、可解釋的文風檢查,而不是猜測作者身分。也適合放進測試,因為相同輸入永遠得到相同分數。
執行需求
以 stdio 在本機執行,需要 Node.js 18 以上版本。可透過 npx 從 GitHub 規格安裝,或使用自帶相依套件的 MCPB 套件(建議 v1.0.2)。不需要 API 金鑰、帳號、網路存取或環境變數。
安裝前請注意
分數衡量的是文風而非作者身分:低分只代表讀起來空泛,並不表示由機器產生,專業文案也可能得低分。詞表帶有主觀立場且僅支援英文。較早的 v1.0.0 與 v1.0.1 套件附有過時的基準數字與評分規則。

安裝

在 SourceWeft 中

  1. 開啟 儀表板中的 AI Slop Checker,將其新增到工作區。
  2. 為需要使用其工具的對話啟用該服務。

Desktop only,透過 STDIO。 STDIO 服務會啟動本機處理程序,因此需要 SourceWeft 桌面主機。

其他 MCP 客戶端

參照 儲存庫 中的啟動說明。

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

來源:README.md,提交 4fcfe60

工具

0
SourceWeft 尚未在沙箱中啟動過該軟體包,因此其工具未知。

版本歷史

1
  1. v1.0.2最新Sep 16, 2026

評分

已滿足適用檢查項的 50%

該評分衡量此收錄條目的完整程度,依據註冊中心條目、端點與公開來源計算得出。它不是對伺服器本身的評價,也不表示伺服器安全或目前可用:可連通性是帶日期的檢查結果,評分也不包含安裝量或使用者評價。

  • 近 30 天內可連通25 分

    請保持端點能夠回應 MCP 握手;SourceWeft 每 30 天探測一次。

  • 已宣告認證方式10 分

    請在註冊中心條目中宣告憑證請求標頭,或保持端點能夠回應探測,以便判定其認證方式。

  • 已列出工具15 分

    請讓伺服器在無憑證時回應 tools/list,或發布可在沙箱中無憑證啟動的軟體包。

  • 描述必需15 分
  • 圖示10 分
  • 文件15 分
  • 授權條款10 分