AI Answer Guard — Source Integrity & Action Preflight

io.github.Nakagawa-masterPublished by GitHub account Nakagawa-masterv1.2.0Updated Nov 6, 2026

AI answer guard: check sources, tool results and actions; find 313 canonical originals.

The publisher's own server: 370.ai — AI Gateway: 100+ Chat Models, Image & Speech Generation

VerifiedSTDIODesktop onlyKnowledge & MemoryAI & ML

Overview

AI-generated overview

Local MCP bundle that checks AI answers, tool results and actions against a public archive of 313 original source contexts.

What you can do
  • Check sources, tool results and proposed actions against a published archive of original source contexts
  • Route a real problem to fitting originals, with an exact parent map and a source-first routing map
  • Inspect evidence boundaries for reported cases such as tool-name collisions, retried approvals and undelivered results
  • Run or reuse self-contained local checks and report a tested counterexample
  • Read the archive and comparison material without installing anything
When to use it
Worth adding if you want an assistant to trace claims back to documented original sources, or to separate a completed AI task from a recorded outside effect before acting on it. The README says reading and comparing the source needs no installation, so install only if you want the checks available inside a client.
Requirements
Runs as a local stdio process from an MCP bundle package; desktop client only, no web execution. No authentication, environment variables or headers are declared. The README states no plugin, MCP installation or AI account is needed merely to read or compare the source.
Before you install
The README describes itself as a public, non-canonical entry to one author's work, and several listed cases are marked open, pending or without a released fix, so treat status claims as unverified. It asks users not to disclose credentials, customer logs or unrelated people when reporting results. No tools are listed in the manifest, so the actual tool surface cannot be confirmed before installing.

Installation

In SourceWeft

  1. Open AI Answer Guard — Source Integrity & Action Preflight in the dashboard and add it to a workspace.
  2. Enable the server for the chats that should use its tools.

Desktop only via STDIO. STDIO servers start a local process, so they need the SourceWeft desktop host.

Other MCP clients

Follow the launch instructions in the repository.

README

Machine Discovery — real problems, original sources and reproducible evidence

A tool can appear to be available and still disappear in a name collision. An AI action can be marked approved without its outside effect ever being recorded. These are checkable engineering decisions covered here, alongside actual source reports, independent repairs and tests you can reproduce or challenge.

This is a public, non-canonical entry to the original work of 中川マスター (Nakagawa Master, pen name of Keisuke Nakagawa), independently authored implementation evidence and optional verification tools. No plugin, MCP installation or AI account is required merely to read or compare the source. Choose a real question first; return to the actual original when its conditions fit. A contrary result or genuine non-fit is useful.

Choose by the problem in front of you

Real questionPublic source or runnable check
Qwen Code: Can duplicate MCP tool names hide otherwise usable tools?Original reporter installed-version C4 check pending (no reply yet), Clean/collision fixture and independent installed-CLI retest, original reporter, different engineer's merged fix, official v0.26.6 release and v0.26.7 release
Mastra/Inngest: When an AI tool approval is retried after the sender loses an acknowledgment, can the same real action run twice?Nakagawa Master's source-specific lost-ACK counterexample → independent author's acknowledgment and tested deduplication. Current outside PR implementation also addresses crash recovery and multi-call approvals after a different reviewer's separate findings. PR remains open; installed-user results pending. Exact source/actor proof.
Hermes Agent: A delegated AI task finished, but did its final answer reach the right human chat?Original Telegram reporter post-release C4 check pending (no reply yet), One directly readable human result-check, Actual Telegram/gateway reporter, Nakagawa Master's origin-absent safety check, separate engineer's merged correction, official releases v0.22.6 / v0.22.7. Verify the actual recipient's installed version and delivered result; a completed internal job is a different event.
LiteLLM MCP: An expired OAuth token makes a tool list look empty. Is the client really unauthorized, or is the gateway hiding a 401?Read-only user check in JA/EN/ZH, actual affected-client report → Nakagawa Master's aggregate-vs-scoped route check → independent developer's explicit acknowledgment and code/test correction (author commit). An aggregate /mcp request may allow exactly one server without becoming a per-server URL; test /mcp and /mcp/docs separately before attributing an empty list to expired credentials. PR OPEN, separate OAuth challenge forwarding concern unresolved; no released fix or affected-client retest claimed.
LiteLLM deadline: Do provider retries respect the total caller timeout, not merely each attempt?Everyday no-MCP explanation, Real operator issue #49751 → Nakagawa Master's first boundary review → independent engineer's 3 retry tests + 2 attempt-cap tests → Master's body-only timeout review → same independent author's body-timeout fix + 2 new tests. The author addressed @Nakagawa-master directly about the second fix. OPEN, CI action_required, independent unresolved HIGH security review; no merge, release, user retest or proof of original-theory use. Current source/AI decision boundary.
LiteLLM: Do calendar and fixed rolling spend windows change a customer's budget decision?Source-bounded local window audit, including counterexamples and period limits
AI agent: Did approval actually result in a recorded outside effect?14-case local approval/effect lab and public developer discussion
Human researcher: Which original source could illuminate a specific real problem?313 published source contexts, individually linked, exact Parent map, complete official author-and-source homepage (the separate /theory-archive/ URL is an earlier three-paper experiment), problem-first entry
Independent AI / tool builder: Can I inspect and decide which source fits, without an installed connector?Source-first routing map, machine-readable outside-evidence index, optional public MCP source router
Editor / educator: What did the independent engineer or outside editor actually do?Independently edited EN/FR article, runnable pinned-Git demonstration, human-readable real-world cases

Read an original rather than an index substitute: An unrelated reader or AI can begin with a real question, use all 313 documented Parent links or the complete author-and-source homepage, then open the actual fitting original article and check its causal conditions, limits, counterexample, and relations to other originals. One problem can need several originals; one original can address many problems; a non-fit is an honest answer. No installed MCP, particular model, or prior connection is necessary. The /theory-archive/ experiment page is not the whole corpus. For actual outside effects, separately inspect the source author, implementer, real release and affected-user observations instead of inferring them from this index.

Distinguish actual independent results from availability

An independently authored Qwen code fix was merged and officially shipped. The separate safe installed-user retest checks the next question — did an unrelated user's own environment actually behave correctly? The outside EN/FR editor independently chose and published another source-integrity case; publication is not the same thing as verified readers.

For asynchronous work, start by separating task completed from the intended person or bot actually received its result. The Hermes reporter's source case concerned a completed delegation whose final output remained undelivered when the saved session origin was absent. Read the distinct implementer's merged repair and the recipient's own version/result before applying that explanation to another incident; a task that never completed needs a different diagnosis.

The original theories are not a fixed one-question/one-answer scheme. A source may fit multiple contexts, several sources may combine, and contrary or non-fitting examples matter. Credit independent developers, distinguish original theory from later application, and do not attribute a case to an original that the receiver never used.

Independently test or reuse

Run a relevant self-contained technical example, examine an original, or report a tested counterexample. State the installed version, input conditions and actual observed outcome without disclosing credentials, customer logs or unrelated people. Independent people and AI systems decide for themselves what is useful.

Voluntary real-use, contrary-result or source-specific correction form.

Complete earlier technical material

Full Technical Reference Catalog — preserved earlier README verbatim retains all original examples, links, evidence boundaries and 53 headings. It is the same public information, moved out of the first-contact entry to make inspection and selective retrieval practical. No original claim is deleted.

Original section anchors (open the complete text for each)

Separate teammate messages from mutable tool progress — 14 portable checks

Complete section.

Agent-team truth and host receipt ordering — 38 runnable local cases

Complete section.

Exact GraphQL schema rejection versus a coincidental error string — merged cache case

Complete section.

AI memory snapshots: an ignored idempotency save must have no hidden inserts

Complete section.

Nested-agent resume: a finished action must not run again on an old approval

Complete section.

Final consumer input must match what was actually checked

Complete section.

Check whether an AI conversation survived an actual storage-format migration

Complete section.

Two AI routes advertised: does one survive loss of the other's exclusive gate?

Complete section.

Continuous AI-worker admission: when an idle-only retirement bound can be bypassed

Complete section.

Agent budget ownership versus actual admission

Complete section.

Original OD312: viable continuation is not a document or a final total

Complete section.

Tool and hook provenance — a matching string is not the runtime's receipt

Complete section.

Runnable agent decision boundary — risk label is not present permission

Complete section.

Core files

Complete section.

Runnable check — independent evidence roots

Complete section.

Runnable, offline OD311 comparison worksheet (AI infrastructure)

Complete section.

Fast route — repeated external Origin preservation

Complete section.

What the different evidence dates and counts mean (checked 2026-10-10)

Complete section.

Runnable, offline AI stream-final-event consistency check

Complete section.

Recent receiver-owned regression boundary — numeric precision in Qdrant

Complete section.

Offline concurrency boundary — recording shard after finalization

Complete section.

Qwen ACP teammate approval — distinguish one listener from one real permission subject

Complete section.

When an AI teammate report was marked read but never durably delivered

Complete section.

Qwen Java/TypeScript JSON envelope parity — receiver's actual repaired regression and remaining negative

Complete section.

Post-merge receiver decision: check the JSON depth gate before MQ2b wiring

Complete section.

Reproducible Redis preflight check — reject invalid embeddings before index overwrite

Complete section.

Previous official derivative — OD311

Complete section.

Related official derivative — OD310

Complete section.

Related official derivative — OD309

Complete section.

Related official derivative — OD308

Complete section.

Related official derivative — OD307

Complete section.

Related official derivative — OD306

Complete section.

Related official derivative — OD305

Complete section.

Related official derivative — OD304

Complete section.

Related official derivative — OD303

Complete section.

Retrieval paths

Complete section.

Human-readable companions

Complete section.

Start Here

Complete section.

Story-first cross-domain entry

Complete section.

Public Origin overview

Complete section.

Real-problem public dialogue

Complete section.

Constructive AI / organization design

Complete section.

Approval-history / current-authority route

Complete section.

AI moral-uncertainty practical route

Complete section.

Origin-preservation practical route

Complete section.

Identity / ownership provenance practical route

Complete section.

Continuity practical route

Complete section.

Other discovery companions

Complete section.

Identity / Origin resolution

Complete section.

Interpretation boundaries

Complete section.

Human navigation

Complete section.

Latest official derivative — OD312

Complete section.

Source: machine-discovery/README.md at commit 755e52f

Tools

0
SourceWeft has not started this package in its sandbox yet, so its tools are not known.

Version history

3
  1. v1.2.0LatestOct 29, 2026
  2. v1.1.1Oct 26, 2026
  3. v1.1.0Oct 22, 2026

Score

40% of the applicable checks met

How complete this listing is, computed from the registry entry, the endpoint and public sources. Not a rating of the server and not a statement that it is safe or working today: reachability is a dated check, and no installs or reviews go into the score.

  • Reached in the last 30 days25 pts

    Keep the endpoint answering the MCP handshake; SourceWeft probes it every 30 days.

  • Auth declared10 pts

    Declare the credential headers in the registry entry, or keep the endpoint answering the probe so its auth can be classified.

  • Tools listed15 pts

    Answer tools/list without a credential, or ship a package that starts in a sandbox without one.

  • DescriptionRequired15 pts
  • Logo10 pts
  • Documentation15 pts
  • License10 pts

    Declare a license in the repository or the registry entry.

Other Router integrations