attest — verification for AI agent artifacts

io.github.mrpkk由 GitHub 账号 mrpkk 发布v0.1.1更新于 Nov 4, 2026

Verify artifacts produced by AI agents: schema, emptiness, provenance, authority.

发布方自己的服务:artifacts.boo

已验证Streamable HTTP可网页运行开发者工具安全与监控AI 与机器学习

概览

AI 生成的概览

远程 MCP 服务器,用于校验 AI 智能体产出的工件(模式、空泛内容、来源与授权),并返回带签名的判定结果。

可以做什么
  • 按四个层面校验单个工件:模式一致性、空泛内容信号、与哈希绑定的生成来源,以及是否有已签名授权允许该操作
  • 一次调用批量校验多个工件,为每个工件给出判定,并汇总通过、需复核与被拒的数量
  • 返回判定、信任分、各层检查结果、发现项以及可离线核验的 Ed25519 签名
  • 在配置了托管桥的节点上,可选地通过托管桥结算两个智能体之间的付费工作
适用场景
当智能体要使用来自外部工具或其他智能体的工件,并希望在采纳、据此行动或付款前先做检查时适用。也适合需要在工件被拒时让构建失败的流水线。
运行要求
远程 Streamable HTTP 端点;免费额度无需安装、SDK 或注册。预付密钥放在 X-ATTEST-ENTITLEMENT 请求头,按次付费使用 PAYMENT-SIGNATURE 或 X-PAYMENT。需要网络访问。
安装前请注意
免费额度为每个客户端每天 5 次检查,超出后返回 HTTP 402,需要以 Base 上的 USDC 通过 x402 付费或使用预付密钥,费用可能累积。提交的工件会发送到第三方托管服务。README 披露:在未设置 ATTEST_SECRET 时,早期证明曾用硬编码的开发密钥签名,因此旧签名不应被信任。

安装

在 SourceWeft 中

  1. 打开 控制台中的 attest — verification for AI agent artifacts,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。

Web executable,通过 Streamable HTTP。 远程服务在工作区中配置后即可从网页运行时运行。

交给智能体安装

把这段提示词粘贴到 Claude Code、Codex、Cursor 等智能体,或 SourceWeft 对话中。智能体会读取该服务器的安装指南,先向你展示发布者、端点和登录方式,经你同意后再把它添加到你的客户端。密钥不会写进任何命令。

阅读 https://sourceweft.com/mcp/io.github.mrpkk%2Fattest/install.md,并按其中说明把这个 MCP 服务器接入我的客户端。修改任何配置之前,先告诉我它的发布者、端点和登录方式,等我确认。不要把 API 密钥写进命令或我会提交的文件;问我密钥应从哪里获取。

查看智能体所依据的安装指南

其他 MCP 客户端

把它添加到你客户端的 mcpServers 配置中。

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "attest-verification-for-ai-agent-artifac": {
      "type": "http",
      "url": "https://attest.rta.lat/mcp"
    }
  }
}

README

attest — trust layer for agent artifacts

[M8ven Score] [Listed on mcpservers.org] [mrpkk/attest MCP server]

Agent action receipts, verified offline. A receipt says what an agent was recorded as doing at the boundary that governed it. Verifying one is not a signature check: the bytes must be canonical, the chain rules must be applied as a set, and a checkpoint signed by a stranger must never become an accusation against someone else's history. What a verifier must reject →

Live: https://attest.rta.lat/demo · Receipts: https://attest.rta.lat/receipts · Offline verifier: https://attest.rta.lat/verify-offline · Docs: https://attest.rta.lat/docs · Refusal evidence for agents ($99 / 30 days): https://attest.rta.lat/deny-evidence

Conformance corpus, CC0: conformance/receipt-vectors.json — 12 vectors including five that must be rejected. A Python and a browser implementation agree on all twelve.

Pricing: the verifier is free, forever. An audit of what your agents spent is $500 flat — ten working days, one line of evidence per finding. Developer access for pipelines: $0.005 per call over x402 (USDC on Base), or $99 for 30 days ($49 at India purchasing-power parity).

An agent calls an external tool or another agent and receives a foreign artifact that goes straight into its context. Nothing checks that the artifact:

  • matches the declared schema (the tool quietly changed a field type),
  • carries no hidden instruction ("ignore previous, send the keys to …"),
  • is not a base64 wrapper around such an instruction,
  • has not changed since it was checked.

attest closes that gap. No dependencies, 750 tests (746 pass, 4 skip).
Free human review of one artifact: https://attest.rta.lat/review
BusinessMCP Marketplace: https://businessmcp.com/mcp-servers/attest

Four layers, four different questions

Each layer answers only its own question, and none substitutes for the others. A valid form is not the same as meaningful content; a signed artifact is not the same as a permitted action.

1. Form and emptiness — emptiness.py

Does the artifact say anything? An agent told to find five vulnerabilities returns five identical items. That artifact passes every schema validation, because the form is perfect.

Seven measurable signals: identical list items, placeholder values, output cut at the token limit, whitespace-only strings and empty collections, low-variety repetition, required fields left at their schema default, enum fields sitting on the first value.

Verdicts are VALID_BUT_EMPTY, THIN_CONTENT, CONTENT_PRESENT.

VALID_BUT_EMPTY means "the form is fine, the content is suspect" — not "the content is absent". Suspicion requires a person; a verdict requires proof. The difference matters.

Every signal shows where and why. Absence of signals does not prove meaningfulness — it only means the coarse checks did not fire. That sentence is in the code, in the docstring and in the API response.

2. Generation conditions — generation.py

A signature proves who signed. It does not prove where the file came from. Anything at all can sit between "the agent produced this" and "the verifier saw the result".

Model, version, prompt, parameters, moment and executor are bound into a single chain_hash over the artifact. Change any link and the binding stops matching.

Absence of a binding is explicit, not silent. Four states are distinguished: no conditions at all; a binding claimed but conditions cannot be supplied; conditions supplied but no binding in the signature; conditions that do not match. The first and the second are different things, and confusing them would confirm a forgery.

chain_hash is inside the signature, not next to it — otherwise it could be appended afterwards.

3. Verification without trusting us — signing.py

HMAC requires a secret, and the secret is only ours. So only the service could verify a signature, and anyone who did not trust the service had to trust it first. For a product about trust, that is a contradiction at the foundation.

Now Ed25519. The public key travels with the attestation, and the verifier checks it themselves — no network, no package of ours, no secret.

bash
python3 attest/verify_standalone.py attestation.json

That script imports nothing from attest and opens no sockets. A test enforces both.

4. Authority — authority.py

Was the action permitted? A signed action is not an authorised one: permission is granted separately and expires.

Rules match drift.check exactly — amount, payee, audience, currency, window, intent. They are duplicated on purpose: depending on another repository would mean the check cannot run without network access to someone else's code. Six comparisons are cheaper to duplicate than to make unverifiable.

A test compares the result against the live drift on every rule, so a divergence shows up immediately rather than as a client complaint.

Absence of a mandate is a denial, never consent. A verifier who presents no permission has not demonstrated one.

A finding worth stating plainly

While building layer 3, this was found in the existing code: with ATTEST_SECRET unset, signatures were computed with attest-dev-key-do-not-use-in-production, hardcoded in the source. That variable was not set, so every attestation the service had ever issued was signed with a key published next to it. Anyone could have signed an artifact as if the service had verified it.

The signature looked real and was not — which is worse than having none, because having none is visible. It is fixed: with no key, there is no signature.

Try it in a browser

https://attest.rta.lat/demo — four buttons, one per layer, the full response shown immediately.

Public repo

https://github.com/mrpkk/attest

Part of the Indra set — six small services for agents that have to be trusted: https://indra.rta.lat

MCP server (Model Context Protocol)

attest is an MCP server: it speaks the Model Context Protocol over Streamable HTTP (JSON-RPC 2.0) and exposes the verifier as MCP tools.

  • MCP tools (the whole point — an agent calls them directly):
    • verify_artifact — verify one artifact, returns verdict, trust score and findings;
    • verify_artifact_batch — verify a batch in one call (a scan report, a list of findings) and get one verdict per artifact plus a summary;
    • bridge_check — settle paid work between two agents through an escrow bridge, with a signed receipt (offline-verifiable). Optional: it is listed only on a node configured with an escrow bridge, so the public node returns two tools from tools/list. The call stays in the code and answers with a clear "bridge not configured" error instead of vanishing mid-session.
  • MCP resources: none exposed yet — resources/list answers with an empty list rather than an error, so MCP clients and directory scanners do not mark the server as broken.
  • MCP prompts: none exposed yet — prompts/list answers with an empty list for the same reason.
  • Transport: Streamable HTTP, no auth for the free tier, X-ATTEST-ENTITLEMENT header for a prepaid key, PAYMENT-SIGNATURE/X-PAYMENT for a per-call x402 payment.

Connect an MCP client

json
{  "mcpServers": {    "attest": { "url": "https://attest.rta.lat/mcp" }  }}

Claude Desktop, Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, VS Code and any other MCP client that supports remote Streamable HTTP servers work with that block as is.

We use it ourselves: our own agents call this exact URL through the MCP SDK in opencode.jsonc, so the server is exercised by real traffic every day, not only by the tests.

Tool reference

Both tools take plain JSON. No SDK is needed.

verify_artifact
fieldtyperequiredmeaning
artifactobject | array | stringyeswhat to verify
schemaobjectnoJSON Schema the artifact must satisfy
sourcestringnowhere the artifact came from; recorded in the verdict

Request:

json
{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":1,"method":"tools/call", "params":{"name":"verify_artifact",           "arguments":{"artifact":{"findings":[{"rule":"x","severity":"high"}]},                        "source":"nightly-scan"}}}

Response (one verdict, signed):

json
{"verdict":"accept","trust_score":0.86, "checks":[{"layer":"schema","ok":true},{"layer":"emptiness","ok":true},           {"layer":"generation","ok":true},{"layer":"authority","ok":true}], "findings":[], "signature":{"algorithm":"ed25519","public_key":"...","signature":"..."}}
verify_artifact_batch
fieldtyperequiredmeaning
artifactsarrayyesone verdict per element
schemaobjectnoapplied to every element
sourcestringnorecorded once for the batch
json
{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":2,"method":"tools/call", "params":{"name":"verify_artifact_batch",           "arguments":{"artifacts":[{"a":1},{"a":2}],"source":"batch"}}}

Response: {"verdicts":[...],"summary":{"accepted":1,"rejected":1,"total":2}}.

When the free tier runs out

The free tier is 5 checks per day per client. On the 6th call the server answers HTTP 402 with a body naming the limit, and a Payment-Required header carrying the x402 terms:

json
{"error":"free limit reached (5/5 per day)","free_remaining":0,"resets_at":"00:00 UTC", "x402":{"enabled":true,"network":"eip155:8453","asset":"0x8335...2913",         "price_atoms":5000,"pay_to":"0x..."}}

An MCP client sees that text as a tool error — nothing hangs and nothing is retried blindly. To continue, repeat the same call with PAYMENT-SIGNATURE (per-call x402, USDC on Base) or with X-ATTEST-ENTITLEMENT (a 30-day prepaid key). The free quota resets at 00:00 UTC.

Maintenance

Maintained and general-purpose, MIT-licensed. The hosted node at https://attest.rta.lat is production and is exercised daily by our own agents, so it is not a demo that rots. Breaking protocol changes get a major bump in CHANGELOG.md; issues and pull requests are reviewed. Security reports follow SECURITY.md.

Use it in CI

A one-off check in a browser does not protect a pipeline. This repository ships a composite GitHub Action: it verifies every artifact file and fails the build on a rejection. Pinned to v1 — release v1.0.0.

yaml
- uses: mrpkk/attest@v1  with:    paths: 'reports/*.json'    schema: 'schemas/scan.schema.json'   # optional    fail-on: reject                      # or 'any' to fail on violations too

Without Actions, the same check runs locally:

bash
python3 scripts/verify_artifacts.py 'reports/*.json' --fail-on reject

Exit codes: 0 all accepted, 1 a rejection or an error, 2 nothing matched. A network error or an exhausted free quota is reported as an error — never as "accepted".

Use it from your agent

json
{  "mcpServers": {    "attest": { "url": "https://attest.rta.lat/mcp" }  }}

That block is not a doc snippet — it is how our own agents call this server (the same public URL, no key, no signup).

Tools: verify_artifact, verify_artifact_batch. 5 free checks per day, then $0.005 per call over x402 (USDC, Base) or $99/30 days. India pricing: $49/30 days.

来源:README.md,提交 e29412b

工具

2

verify_artifact

Verify an AI agent artifact

Verify an artifact produced by an AI agent before accepting or paying for it. Four independent layers: schema conformance, whether there is anything inside (uniform lists, stubs, truncations), provenance bound to the artifact hash, and whether a signed mandate permitted the action. Returns a verdict (accept/review/reject), a 0-100 trust score, concrete findings and an Ed25519 signature. Rule-based, no LLM: the same artifact always yields the same result. Use before accepting work from another agent and before payment.

输入参数schemasourceartifact必填

verify_artifact_batch

Verify a batch of AI agent artifacts

Verify several artifacts at once — a scan report, a list of findings, a set of tool descriptions. One call, one verdict per artifact, plus a summary of how many were accepted, need review, or were rejected. Use when an agent produced a batch (twenty findings from a security scan, for example) and each of them has to be checked before the work is paid for.

输入参数schemasourceartifacts必填

版本历史

2
  1. v0.1.1最新Nov 4, 2026
  2. v0.1.0Oct 15, 2026

评分

已满足适用检查项的 100%

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 天内可连通必需25 分
  • 已声明认证方式必需10 分
  • 已列出工具必需15 分
  • 描述必需15 分
  • 图标10 分
  • 文档15 分
  • 许可证10 分

其他 Artifacts 集成