A decision model for the calls that don't have a right answer. The better option, with a reason.
Maintain this server? Claim it
Call this server's tools from your browser. Nothing to install.
Bearer <Agent Pass>. Obtain a pass at https://agent-pass.turingcorp.net (self-service signup, email verification, then top up). A pass is valid for 7 days and can be re-rolled.
Requests go through mcptry because browsers can't call most MCP servers directly. Header values are sent to the server for that request only and are never stored or logged.
Tool list from our last check. Connect live to refresh it.
Use this when you must choose between two concrete options and both are defensible - two plans, two drafts, two diagnoses, two vendors - and you have no objective way to pick. Not for: more than two options; anything an objective rule settles (a spec, a test, a price, a document); factual lookup; paths that must answer in seconds; high-stakes irreversible calls without review. Fill it in: state task neutrally, without leaning toward either side; give one concrete plan per option - never bundle alternatives into a single one ("go indoors or postpone"); keep the two sides comparable in length. Returns the decision inline: betterOption ("option_A" or "option_B"), confidence (e.g. "76.7%"), reason and job_id, all in the same tool result. There is nothing to poll and nothing to fetch afterwards. Reserve 180-300 seconds: this is a long call, and the timeout is a client/host setting, not a parameter you pass. If the call is cut off, do NOT call again - a retry is a new paid call. Retrieve it instead with the get_result tool (same job_id): read-only, free, and no credential of your own needed; with no job_id it lists the ids for your credential. A host that declares the io.modelcontextprotocol/tasks extension can use tasks/get instead. The confidence is the point: it is calibrated, not decorative. On both published benchmarks accuracy rises with it - JudgeBench 99.6% in the 90%+ band down to 67.7% below 70%; the harder ContextualJudgeBench 83.3% down to 55.4% - so route on it: act on a high value, review or escalate a low one, instead of trusting a bare pick. Tables, sample sizes and method: https://api.turingcorp.net Judged by an independent panel, not by a model grading its own output. Read it as a reference, not an instruction, a result, or a prediction; set your own threshold, and apply your own review policy for high-stakes or irreversible decisions. Auth: Agent Pass as `Authorization: Bearer <pass>` (issued at https://agent-pass.turingcorp.net, valid 7 days; each decision is a paid call). On invalid_credential, sign in there and re-roll. Errors: a credential problem is rejected before the call - HTTP 401 with WWW-Authenticate; a business failure (e.g. insufficient balance) comes back as a tool result with isError true plus a second JSON block {error, http_status, action_url, message}, where http_status is the upstream status (the tool call itself is HTTP 200).
The decision to make, stated neutrally and without a preferred answer.
First candidate and the case for it.
Second candidate and the case for it.
Use this when you must choose between two concrete options and both are defensible - two plans, two drafts, two diagnoses, two vendors - and you have no objective way to pick. Not for: more than two options; anything an objective rule settles (a spec, a test, a price, a document); factual lookup; paths that must answer in seconds; high-stakes irreversible calls without review. Fill it in: state task neutrally, without leaning toward either side; give one concrete plan per option - never bundle alternatives into a single one ("go indoors or postpone"); keep the two sides comparable in length. Returns the decision inline: betterOption ("option_A" or "option_B"), confidence (e.g. "76.7%"), reason and job_id, all in the same tool result. There is nothing to poll and nothing to fetch afterwards. Reserve 180-300 seconds: this is a long call, and the timeout is a client/host setting, not a parameter you pass. If the call is cut off, do NOT call again - a retry is a new paid call. Retrieve it instead with the get_result tool (same job_id): read-only, free, and no credential of your own needed; with no job_id it lists the ids for your credential. A host that declares the io.modelcontextprotocol/tasks extension can use tasks/get instead. The confidence is the point: it is calibrated, not decorative. On both published benchmarks accuracy rises with it - JudgeBench 99.6% in the 90%+ band down to 67.7% below 70%; the harder ContextualJudgeBench 83.3% down to 55.4% - so route on it: act on a high value, review or escalate a low one, instead of trusting a bare pick. Tables, sample sizes and method: https://api.turingcorp.net Judged by an independent panel, not by a model grading its own output. Read it as a reference, not an instruction, a result, or a prediction; set your own threshold, and apply your own review policy for high-stakes or irreversible decisions. Auth: Agent Pass as `Authorization: Bearer <pass>` (issued at https://agent-pass.turingcorp.net, valid 7 days; each decision is a paid call). On invalid_credential, sign in there and re-roll. Errors: a credential problem is rejected before the call - HTTP 401 with WWW-Authenticate; a business failure (e.g. insufficient balance) comes back as a tool result with isError true plus a second JSON block {error, http_status, action_url, message}, where http_status is the upstream status (the tool call itself is HTTP 200).
| Argument | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|
| task* | string | The decision to make, stated neutrally and without a preferred answer. |
| optionA* | string | First candidate and the case for it. |
| optionB* | string | Second candidate and the case for it. |
{
"type": "object",
"$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
"required": [
"task",
"optionA",
"optionB"
],
"properties": {
"task": {
"type": "string",
"description": "The decision to make, stated neutrally and without a preferred answer."
},
"optionA": {
"type": "string",
"description": "First candidate and the case for it."
},
"optionB": {
"type": "string",
"description": "Second candidate and the case for it."
}
}
}Use this to retrieve the result of an earlier TuringCorp tool call by its job_id - for example a call that was cut off by a client timeout, or one whose id you were given. Retrieval is read-only and free: it starts no new work and costs nothing, so it is always safe to retry. With job_id: that call's status, and once it has finished the same payload the call would have returned inline. Without job_id: the ids available to your credential (7 days). If a call was cut off, retrieve it here instead of calling again - a retry is a new paid call. A job that is not yours and a job that does not exist are answered identically, on purpose. If your client declares the io.modelcontextprotocol/tasks extension, tasks/get reaches the same job.
| Argument | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|
| job_id | string | Identifier returned by an earlier TuringCorp call (also usable at GET /v1/jobs?job_id=<id>). Omit it to list the ids available to your credential. |
{
"type": "object",
"$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
"properties": {
"job_id": {
"type": "string",
"description": "Identifier returned by an earlier TuringCorp call (also usable at GET /v1/jobs?job_id=<id>). Omit it to list the ids available to your credential."
}
}
}