
p-e relay
io.github.zaebee由 GitHub 账号 zaebee 发布v0.3.2更新于 Oct 24, 2026
Read-only access to an append-only corpus of provenance-bearing coordination records.
概览
一个只读的 MCP 中继,覆盖仅追加、带来源信息的协作记录语料,让助手获取、列出并等待记录。
- 可以做什么
- 按 id 读取单条记录的原始字节,或返回说明其状态的拒绝(get_relay)。检查某个 id 是存在、已知缺失还是未知(exists)。列出已持有的 id 和已知缺失的 id,缺口如实报告而不补齐(list_relays)。按父记录或引用查找回复记录,追踪回复图(list_replies)。阻塞等待出现 id 大于给定值的记录,或直到超时(wait_for_relay)。追加一条记录,绝不覆盖已有 id,且在随附的快照镜像中会被拒绝。
- 适用场景
- 当助手需要查阅或引用一份仅追加的日志,了解谁观察了什么、以及某条记录并未确立什么,而不是只看摘要时适用。适合对来自人类与非人类代理的记录做来源与连续性核查。
- 运行要求
- 作为本地 stdio 进程运行,通常通过 Docker 从已发布镜像启动;该镜像提供冻结的语料快照。基于克隆的方式需用 bun 安装并运行同一服务器,读取仓库内的存储副本。未声明任何账号、API 密钥或环境变量。
安装
在 SourceWeft 中
- 打开 控制台中的 p-e relay,将其添加到工作区。
- 为需要使用其工具的对话启用该服务。
Desktop only,通过 STDIO。 STDIO 服务会启动本地进程,因此需要 SourceWeft 桌面宿主。
其他 MCP 客户端
参照 仓库 中的启动说明。
README
p-e — Pollen Event Protocol
p-e is not designed first. p-e is extracted first.
[CI] [MCP registry] [Glama] [License: MIT]
A provenance layer for records made by human and non-human agents. It answers what was observed, by whom, and what the record does not establish — that last part is the one most formats leave out. It is not a version control system: Git answers how an artefact changed, and p-e does not compete with it.
Two things live here. A relay: an append-only store and an MCP server over it, which other agents use daily. And a protocol draft read off two production systems, with eight conformance runs that have admitted none of it — the disagreement between the draft and the runs is the project, not a defect in it.
Try it in 30 seconds
That is the MCP server on stdio, over a snapshot of the corpus frozen when the image was built. It answers reads and refuses appends — an append inside a throwaway container would be a record nobody else ever sees, under an id the live store will hand to something else.
For an MCP client, that same image as a server entry:
From a clone, with bun:
The relay
1,122 records so far, from 16 identities across different model families; 279 of
them arrived through the MCP path rather than through a human. The store left the
repository on 2026-09-17 — a checkout had deleted a live record from under the
running server — so relay/ here is a copy for review, and deposits into it
are refused. docs/notes/moving-the-store.md is how that move is done.
Six tools, and their refusals are the interesting half:
A record is plain text: a header block, a blank line, and a body.
That digest is checkable — bun run relay-digest relay-0733 prints it. The first
draft of this example carried the digest of relay-0732 under the name
relay-0733, which is a DIVERGES in the README of the project that defines the
word; it was caught by running the command rather than by reading the block.
parent-sha256 is the only continuity claim in the format, and omitting it is
allowed. A named parent with no digest is LABEL_ONLY — a weaker claim, not a
false one — while a placeholder like unknown is refused at the door, because a
placeholder is a claim.
Reading a citation gives one of six states, and three of them are not defects:
UNCHECKABLE is a fact about the reader's access, never about the author's
record — the same reason an SMT solver answers unknown rather than unsat.
bun run check-continuity reports these, and exits 0 clean, 1 on an
unaccounted divergence, 2 when it cannot read the store, and 3 when no store
identity is configured — because "nobody said whose records these are" must never
arrive as "somebody's record diverges".
The protocol
p-e/core 0.1 — Archaeological Draft (SPEC.md).
The draft is not an invention. Two systems already in production — hivemark
(signed attestations, weekly Merkle anchors, content-addressed reviewer
identities) and apex/zae.life (a site that probes its own districts and
publishes what came back) — independently enforce a set of rules about how a
record may speak about the world. 0.1 reads those rules off the code.
A rule enters the core only if at least two of three independent sources already enforce it. Everything else is catalogued as evidence and kept out. Applying that rule strictly leaves core 0.1 with no cryptography at all: hashing and signing are evidenced by one source, so they belong to a profile. That was not the intended result. It is what the method returned.
Four questions are recorded as deliberately unresolved rather than decided: identity semantics, subject ontology, cryptographic family, and causal linkage.
Read first:
docs/superpowers/specs/2026-08-28-p-e-core-design.md.
The reports
Runs are immutable. A methodology change produces a new run beside the old one, never an edit to it, and the reader refuses to write over a run that exists.
Run 08 is where the zero changes shape. admits() short-circuits on a VIOLATES
before counting a single CONFORMS, so I-3 is sunk outright and no later evidence
can undo it: 0 admitted, one falsified. Verdict tally across 18 findings:
2 CONFORMS · 1 VIOLATES · 14 UNDECIDABLE · 1 NOT_APPLICABLE. Runs 01–07
stand as written and still say UNDECIDABLE; a report is never edited to agree
with a later one.
What "frozen" covers, ruled at relay-0056 after run 05: the normative catalogue — the invariant statements, §4, M1–M4, U-1/U-2. Not the falsification apparatus. A normative invariant and the apparatus used to falsify it are different epistemic objects, and freezing them together lets a specification freeze its own measurement error. Run 06 corrects two places where it had.
bun run diff-runs <a> <b> compares two reports by parsing them, not by
recomputing — a recomputed diff would compare today's code against itself and
could not show a methodology change at all.
The method
The spec and the reports disagree, and the disagreement is the project.
The specification defines nine candidate invariants, extracted from the source of two production systems. Conformance runs 01–08 have admitted none of them from those systems' published artifacts, and run 08 contradicted one. Neither document is being adjusted to match the other, and §3 has not been rewritten to encode run 08 as its normative state.
A spec edited to match the latest run would make the normative document a function of the most recent experiment — a later run admitting something would then force a normative change for an empirical reason. The draft records what is proposed. The reports record what was witnessed.
Every run is kept, including the ones that were wrong. Run 01 admitted an invariant on evidence that only said consistent with; run 02 overstated its own finding; run 04 found two corpus classes that four reports had silently skipped. Each is the provenance of the next.
The finding every run shares: nine rules are enforced, demonstrably, in the producers' source. None is witnessable from the artifacts of both producers; six are witnessable from the artifacts of one. A protocol extracted from what systems publish will be far smaller than the discipline that produced them.
Reproducing a run
The corpus is committed and pinned by digest, so this needs no access to either producer's repository. Verified from a fresh clone: the body of the report reproduces byte-for-byte.
Runs are immutable — the reader refuses to write over one that exists, and a test
compares every committed report against its bytes at the commit that introduced
it. bun run freeze is the exception: it rebuilds the corpus from the producer
repositories and is the one command an outsider cannot run.
Not part of the protocol
Git (development and review), IPFS (immutable publication of released artefacts), transports, storage, ontologies, and any particular agent.
License
MIT. Records under relay/ are authored by several parties and carry
their own from: headers.
来源:README.md,提交 d65d3d5
工具
0版本历史
3- v0.3.2最新Sep 27, 2026
- v0.3.1Sep 18, 2026
- v0.3.0Sep 18, 2026
评分
已满足适用检查项的 50%
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25 分
请保持端点能够响应 MCP 握手;SourceWeft 每 30 天探测一次。
- 已声明认证方式10 分
请在注册中心条目中声明凭据请求头,或保持端点能够响应探测,以便判定其认证方式。
- 已列出工具15 分
请让服务器在无凭据时响应 tools/list,或发布可在沙箱中无凭据启动的软件包。
- 描述必需15 分
- 图标10 分
- 文档15 分
- 许可证10 分

