
Ownership Provenance Protocol
io.github.bg4ff8mtdn-dotcomPublished by GitHub account bg4ff8mtdn-dotcomv1.0.1Updated Oct 24, 2026
MCP protocol requiring task acceptance and provenance tags. Self-hosted only - see README.
Overview
A small MCP protocol server that makes agents explicitly accept task ownership and tag every completion claim with how it was verified.
- What you can do
- Create tasks in a pending-acceptance state and accept them explicitly, with atomic rejection if another actor already owns the task.
- Report completion only with a provenance tag (observed, reviewed or reported), rejecting calls that omit or invalidate it.
- Hand off tasks with a frozen state snapshot, leaving the recipient to accept ownership themselves.
- Inspect a single task's full history of acceptances, claims and handoffs, and list tasks that currently have no owner.
- When to use it
- Useful when coordinating multi-agent or human-plus-agent work where ownership handoffs get lost and completion claims are stated with more confidence than they earned. It is a narrow reference implementation for testing acceptance and attestation mechanics, not a governance or evaluation platform.
- Requirements
- The manifest lists a remote endpoint, but the README describes a self-hosted setup: Node.js 24, PostgreSQL and pnpm, with DATABASE_URL and MCP_ACCESS_TOKEN set. The MCP server is mounted at /mcp and expects MCP_ACCESS_TOKEN as a bearer token in the Authorization header. At least one actor must exist in the database before any tool call, since no actor-creation tool is provided.
Installation
In SourceWeft
- Open Ownership Provenance Protocol in the dashboard and add it to a workspace.
- Enable the server for the chats that should use its tools.
Web executable via Streamable HTTP. Remote servers run from the web runtime once configured in a workspace.
Use with an agent
Paste this prompt into Claude Code, Codex, Cursor or another agent — or into SourceWeft chat. The agent reads this server's install guide, shows you its publisher, endpoint and sign-in, and adds it to your client once you agree. Keys never go into a command.
Read https://sourceweft.com/mcp/io.github.bg4ff8mtdn-dotcom%2Fownership-provenance-protocol/install.md and connect the MCP server it describes to my client. Before changing any config, show me its publisher, endpoint and sign-in method and wait for my OK. Never put an API key in a command or in a file I would commit; ask me where it should come from.Other MCP clients
Add this to your client's mcpServers config.
{
"mcpServers": {
"ownership-provenance-protocol": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://ownership-provenance-protocol.replit.app/mcp"
}
}
}README
Ownership & Attestation Protocol (OAP)
A small MCP protocol that enforces two rules no mainstream agent framework currently enforces natively:
- A task isn't owned until it's explicitly accepted. Assignment, inference, or ambient context aren't enough — an actor (human or AI agent) must explicitly accept a task before it counts as theirs.
- No completion claim can be reported without saying how the reporting actor knows it's true. Every "this is done" claim carries a mandatory provenance tag:
Observed(I did this myself),Reviewed(I checked evidence of it), orReported(I'm relaying what I was told). There is no fourth option, and there is no way to report completion without picking one.
That's the whole protocol. Everything else in this repo exists in service of those two rules.
Why this exists
Broken ownership handoffs are a commonly cited failure mode in production multi-agent systems — an agent hands work to another agent, context gets lost, and nobody ends up owning the result. Separately, a March 2026 paper on agent identity protocols (Prakash, AIP: Agent Identity Protocol for Verifiable Delegation Across MCP and A2A, arXiv:2603.24775) reports that in the authors' survey, they did not identify a prior implemented protocol that jointly combines verifiable delegation, attenuated authorization, and provenance-oriented completion records.
This project was built to test a narrow, specific fix for both problems at once — not a full governance platform, not an evaluation framework, just the ownership/acceptance and attestation mechanics.
Real-world motivation
Two documented, public incidents shaped this design directly:
- A Replit AI coding agent deleted a production database during an active code freeze, then falsely claimed rollback was impossible — a claim stated with full confidence that was never actually verified. Rollback worked fine once someone actually tried it. (AI Incident Database, Incident #1152)
- Air Canada's chatbot gave a customer incorrect eligibility details for its own bereavement-fare policy, telling him he could claim the discount retroactively when the actual policy required approval before travel. A tribunal ruled the airline liable — establishing that companies own what their AI tells people, whether or not a human ever reviewed the claim first. (Moffatt v. Air Canada, 2024 BCCRT 149, British Columbia Civil Resolution Tribunal)
Both failures are the same shape: a claim stated with more confidence than it had earned. That's the specific thing this protocol is built to catch — not by making agents smarter, but by making it structurally impossible to report a claim without saying how it was actually verified.
The six MCP tools
Protocol invariants
These six statements hold in any conformant implementation, at all times:
- Every task has zero or one current owner.
- Ownership changes only through explicit Acceptance.
- Every completion claim has exactly one provenance value.
- Provenance values never become "more certain" without new evidence — an actor cannot upgrade a Reported claim to Observed without an intervening act of verification. This implementation enforces that by rejecting an
observedclaim that supersedes areportedone on the same task unless the call supplies asourceReferencenaming what was verified. Downgrades, corrections in the other direction, and first claims are unaffected. - Every handoff captures a state snapshot.
- Every task's history is fully reconstructable.
An implementation is OAP-conformant if it requires explicit acceptance, rejects claims without provenance, supports all three provenance categories, preserves reconstructable history, and supports ownership transfer via handoff. Partial implementations should describe themselves as "OAP-inspired," not conformant.
Why not just use logs / Git / OpenTelemetry / Temporal?
Fair question, and the short answer is that OAP is meant to sit alongside these, not replace them:
- Logs record what happened passively, after the fact. OAP requires an active commitment before a claim is accepted as complete.
- Git versions content and records who committed what, but has no concept of an accepted, ongoing obligation separate from the artifact itself.
- OpenTelemetry propagates context through a distributed trace excellently, but has no schema concept equivalent to a provenance tag on a claim of correctness.
- Temporal / durable execution engines solve state persistence and reliable resumption extremely well — this reference implementation is meant to be built on top of something like that, not reinvent it. But durable execution answers "did this step run," not "did the actor own this task by explicit acceptance, and how do we know its completion claim is true."
Running it locally
Requirements: Node.js 24, PostgreSQL, pnpm.
Set the required environment variables:
Push the schema and start the API server:
Create at least one actor before calling any tool. Every tool takes an
actor id, and every one of them requires that actor to already exist — the
actor columns are NOT NULL foreign keys. The protocol deliberately has no
create_actor tool or route: actor identity is an input to OAP, not something
OAP issues, so on a real deployment actors come from whatever system already
owns identity. That means a freshly pushed database has no actors in it and
the first create_task call will fail with a 404 until you add one. For local
development there is a seed script:
It is a plain script, not part of the protocol surface — it is never imported by the server and is not reachable over HTTP.
The MCP server is mounted at /mcp and requires the MCP_ACCESS_TOKEN as a bearer token in the Authorization header on every request except /api/healthz, which stays open for health checks.
Connect a real MCP client (e.g. Claude Code):
Running the tests
The suite covers the protocol's concurrency guarantees, so it needs a real PostgreSQL instance — it exercises genuinely simultaneous transactions and cannot run against an in-process or single-connection substitute.
Tests connect to postgresql://opp:[email protected]:55432/opp_test by
default. Point them elsewhere with OPP_TEST_DATABASE_URL, and push the schema
to that database first. The runner ignores DATABASE_URL entirely and
refuses to start against any non-loopback host: the suite truncates every table
between tests, and inheriting a real connection string would destroy exactly the
provenance record this protocol exists to protect.
Status
This is an early, personally-tested project, not a polished product. It has been built and adversarially tested by hand — concurrency races, malformed inputs, ownership-bypass attempts — and verified end-to-end with a real external MCP client completing the full protocol handshake against a live deployment. The ownership and attestation guarantees that hand-testing covered are now pinned by an automated suite that runs the races concurrently against a real database. It has not been used by anyone beyond its author, and no claims are made about production-readiness beyond what's described above. If you use this and find something that breaks, or a case the invariants don't cover, please open an issue.
License
MIT
Source: README.md at commit aeed118
Tools
0Version history
1- v1.0.1LatestSep 16, 2026
Score
85% 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 daysRequired25 pts
- Auth declaredRequired10 pts
- Tools listedRequired15 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