Verificate MCP

ai.verificate由 verificate.ai 發布官方發布者v1.9.0更新於 Nov 11, 2026

Merge gate for AI-written code: deterministic vetoes plus a Claude Haiku 5.5 review. No signup.

已驗證Streamable HTTP可網頁執行開發者工具AI 與機器學習

概覽

AI 產生的概覽

託管式程式碼審查閘門,讓助理以確定性檢查加上前沿模型審閱來驗證 AI 產生的程式碼、方案與輸出,回傳通過或拒絕的二元結論。

可以做什麼
  • 驗證 AI 產生的程式碼、文件、設定與報告,回傳通過/拒絕的二元結論與依嚴重度排序的問題
  • 在寫程式碼之前審查方案、設計與規格,檢查完整性、可行性、擴充性與風險
  • 對現有程式碼做唯讀的顧問式深入分析,指出效能熱點、限流計算、故障模式與技術債,不給結論
  • 產生程式碼並由同一套閘門檢驗,被拒時重新產生
  • 提供循環執行驗證、修正、再驗證的提示詞,以及說明閘門規則與範例結論的資源
適用情境
適合在助理撰寫或審查程式碼時加入,用外部檢查攔下假實作、虛構的 SDK 呼叫與未經證實的「已完成」宣告,避免進入程式碼庫。也適合審查方案、接手他人程式碼,或把合併閘門接進 CI。
執行需求
遠端 streamable HTTP 端點,不需本機安裝;另提供以 npx 或 Docker 執行的 stdio 橋接。免費額度不需帳號或權杖(每台機器 25 次驗證),超過後需在 Authorization 標頭帶上來自 Verificate 控制台的 bearer 權杖。需要網路連線。
安裝前請注意
屬商業服務:30 天試用後每月 30 美元,驗證引擎在伺服器端且不開放原始碼。程式碼與方案會送到第三方託管閘道處理。Authorization 權杖是個人憑證,有速率限制並會偵測共用,請勿放入共用設定。依你設定的規則,拒絕結論可能阻擋助理的工作。

安裝

在 SourceWeft 中

  1. 開啟 儀表板中的 Verificate MCP,將其新增到工作區。
  2. 為需要使用其工具的對話啟用該服務。

Web executable,透過 Streamable HTTP。 遠端服務在工作區中設定後即可從網頁執行環境執行。

交給代理程式安裝

把這段提示詞貼上到 Claude Code、Codex、Cursor 等代理程式,或 SourceWeft 對話中。代理程式會讀取該伺服器的安裝指南,先向你展示發布者、端點和登入方式,經你同意後再把它新增到你的客戶端。金鑰不會寫進任何命令。

閱讀 https://sourceweft.com/mcp/ai.verificate%2Fmcp/install.md,並按其中說明把這個 MCP 伺服器接入我的客戶端。修改任何設定之前,先告訴我它的發布者、端點和登入方式,等我確認。不要把 API 金鑰寫進命令或我會提交的檔案;問我金鑰應從哪裡取得。

檢視代理程式所依據的安裝指南

其他 MCP 客戶端

把它新增到你客戶端的 mcpServers 設定中。

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "verificate": {
      "type": "http",
      "url": "https://mcp.verificate.ai/mcp"
    }
  }
}

README

Verificate MCP — your vibe-coded MVP, all the way to production

[Verificate Gate]

[Verificate MCP rejecting AI-written payment code at 70, then approving the fix at 91.2 — real output from the live server]

Real output from the live server: 12 lines of AI-written payment code — rejected, fixed, approved, in seconds.

You vibe-coded the demo. This ships it. Between a working demo and a launched product used to stand an experienced CTO and a senior dev team — the people who catch the mock refund path, the invented SDK call, the loop that dies at real traffic. Verificate MCP is that review team as an MCP server: 17 deterministic reality gates with veto power, fused with a frontier-model enterprise review (ISO/IEC 25010: performance, scalability, reliability), run on every AI-written change before it reaches your codebase. The AI writes; the gate holds the bar; you ship. Hosted, zero-install, binary verdict in seconds — in Claude Code, Cursor, Windsurf or any MCP client.

Not another linter wrapper. The code-quality shelf on every MCP directory is two things: scanners (ESLint, Semgrep and SonarQube bridges — deterministic rules, no judgment) and prompt relays that pipe your repo to your own LLM key (self-review with extra steps). Verificate is neither: the gates hold veto power that no model output can override.

[License: MIT] [Official MCP Registry] [Docker MCP Registry] [MCP Market] [Free trial]

Your coding assistant writes a mock and calls it done. It invents an SDK call that doesn't exist. It ships an N+1 loop that passes every test and dies under load. Verificate MCP runs the deep review pass on every AI output — deterministic reality gates first (any one can veto), then an enterprise-grade review scores what survives — before the code reaches your codebase.

A real rejection (verbatim)

12 plausible lines of AI-written payment code were sent through the production gateway. Verdict: REJECTED — score 30.8/100, vetoed by code_reality_gate, with findings including:

"N+1 synchronous API calls … For 100 items, this results in 100 sequential HTTP roundtrips, taking ~10–20 seconds and blocking the event loop/worker thread … will trigger Stripe rate limiting (100 req/sec limit)." "stripe.Inventory is not a valid Stripe SDK resource." "Floating-point representation issues lead to rounding errors in financial transactions; Stripe API requires integer cents."

Each of those is an afternoon of production debugging, caught in seconds.

Measured — vs. asking the model to review its own code

A frontier model asked "is this OK to merge?" in a natural workflow missed reward-gaming (a test that only does assert True) and a hallucinated API (stripe.Refund.create_partial) in 0 of 6 runs each. Verificate's gate caught both 6 of 6 — deterministically, with 0 false positives on clean code.

Adversarial caseLLM review aloneVerificate gate
Reward-gaming (assert True test)0 / 66 / 6
Hallucinated API (nonexistent SDK call)0 / 66 / 6

Battle-tested: 2,581 audited validations over 5 weeks (66 rejected, 270 flagged unfit), including guarding the write-path of a 21M-entity source-cited knowledge base (98.6% cited, 100% licensed across 268 sources). Reproduce it: scripts/ · full write-up: COMPARISON.md.

Tools

Each tool has one job — two gates that return verdicts, one advisor that doesn't, one generator:

ToolJobReturns
validate_ai_outputThe merge gate for AI-written code. Deterministic reality gates (mock/placeholder veto, gaming & bypass detection, invented-API checks) run first and can't be overridden; ISO/IEC 25010 review scores what survives.Binary approve/reject verdict + severity-ranked findings
validate_planThe gate for plans and designs, before any code exists — completeness, feasibility, scalability implications, risk. The cheapest place to catch a bad design.Binary approve/reject verdict + findings
analyze_codeAdvisory deep-dive on existing code — hot paths, rate-limit math, failure modes, tech debt. Use it to understand a rejection or review inherited code.Scores + findings, deliberately no verdict
generate_codeGenerate + gate in one step — the LLM writes it, the same protection engine vets it before you see it.Gated code (no placeholders, no invented APIs)

Beyond tools

The server also ships prompts and resources for a richer client experience:

  • Prompts gate_my_changes / review_my_plan — one-click workflows that loop validate → fix → re-validate until approved.
  • Resources verificate://gates (what each of the 17 deterministic gates watches for) and verificate://example-verdict (a verbatim production rejection).

Quick start — no signup, no token, 30 seconds

Every machine gets 25 free validations — no account, no card, no key. Add the URL and go:

Claude Code

bash
claude mcp add --transport http verificate https://mcp.verificate.ai/mcp

Cursor / VS Code — one-click install:

[Add Verificate to Cursor] [Add to VS Code] [Add to VS Code Insiders]

LM Studio and Goose one-click buttons are at https://verificate.ai/mcp (GitHub strips their custom-protocol links).

Windsurf / any MCP client (JSON)

json
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "verificate": {
      "url": "https://mcp.verificate.ai/mcp",
      "transport": "http"
    }
  }
}

Cursor: ~/.cursor/mcp.json. Windsurf: ~/.codeium/windsurf/mcp_config.json.

Then ask your assistant to "validate this function with verificate" — a structured verdict comes back in seconds, and every free-tier response shows how many validations you have left and what the gate has caught for you.

Keep going after the free 25

Sign up at https://verificate.ai/auth/signup (30-day trial, no card — then $30/mo) and add your token to the same config:

bash
claude mcp add --transport http verificate \
  https://mcp.verificate.ai/mcp \
  --header "Authorization: Bearer YOUR_TRIAL_TOKEN"

or in the JSON config add "headers": { "Authorization": "Bearer YOUR_TRIAL_TOKEN" }.

Make gating the default

Tools an agent may call are tools it will skip under pressure. Add a standing rule (Claude Code: CLAUDE.md; Cursor: a rule file):

text
Before presenting any substantive code change as complete:
1. Call validate_ai_output on the change.
2. If the verdict is REJECTED, fix the findings and re-validate.
3. Never claim tests pass or systems are deployed without proof.

One-paste setup prompts that install these rules for you: PROMPTS.md. Or wire it into CI as a merge gate — see examples/.

How it decides

text
AI output ──► Reality gates (deterministic, any one vetoes)
              • mock/placeholder in the wire path
              • invented/hallucinated APIs
              • claimed-complete without proof
              • gaming & bypass detection
                       │ survivors only
                       ▼
              Enterprise review (ISO/IEC 25010 + MLOps)
              performance · scalability · reliability · tech debt
                       │
                       ▼
              Verdict: score /100 + severity-ranked findings
              (REJECTED = agent fixes findings and re-validates)

The two stages are deliberately separate: if reality and quality were blended into one score, a beautifully structured function that fakes its refund path could still average out to "acceptable." A veto architecture makes that impossible.

The category, honestly

Everything else on the MCP code-quality shelf is free — and that's fair, because a wrapper should be free. What you can't get for free is judgment with authority:

What you'll find on the directoriesWhat it isWhat it structurally can't do
Linter wrappers — ESLint MCP, Semgrep MCP, SonarQube MCPRule-based scanners exposed as MCP tools. Deterministic, free, worth running.No judgment. Rules can't know the refund function never calls the payment provider, or that stripe.Inventory doesn't exist. No verdict, no veto — findings your agent is free to ignore.
BYO-key review relaysYour repo + a review prompt, piped to your own OpenAI/Anthropic key.Self-review with extra steps: the reviewer shares the generator's blind spots, there are no deterministic gates underneath, and whatever the model says goes. You maintain keys, versions and hosting.
A bigger modelHope the generator reviews itself better.Self-review inherits self-blindness. An external gate holds the same bar for every model — which also makes smaller, cheaper models safe to ship with: same gate either way.
Human review of every AI diffThe gold standard, at human speed.Doesn't scale at AI generation speed. The gate does the first pass in seconds; humans review verdicts, not raw diffs.
Verificate MCPDeterministic reality gates with veto, then a frontier-model enterprise review — fused into one binary verdict. Hosted, always on the current model.—

That second layer is the part you pay for: a frontier agent doing the deep review — production arithmetic, failure modes, SDK reality — with a deterministic floor under it that the agent itself cannot argue away.

Run locally (stdio bridge)

This repo is also a runnable, zero-dependency MCP server: a stdio bridge that serves initialize/tools/list locally and forwards tool calls to the hosted gateway. Use it with clients that prefer stdio servers:

bash
VERIFICATE_TOKEN=<your-token> npx github:Verificate-Dev/verificate-mcp-quickstart

Or with Docker:

bash
docker build -t verificate-mcp .
docker run -i -e VERIFICATE_TOKEN=<your-token> verificate-mcp

Without VERIFICATE_TOKEN, introspection still works and tool calls return instructions for getting a trial token.

FAQ

Does it slow the agent down? Each validation takes seconds, inside the loop, before work is presented. Compare with a defect found in CI or production plus the context switch to fix it — gating is net-faster for any change that matters.

Which languages? Validation is language-agnostic; analysis covers mainstream languages (Python, JS/TS, C++, SQL, Swift, …). Pass context.language for best results.

Can it block my agent? Yes — that's the point. A REJECTED verdict is designed to send the agent back to fix findings instead of presenting broken work. Your standing rule decides how hard the stop is.

What about false positives? Verdicts come with specific findings and the math, so they're auditable in seconds — you're never asked to trust a bare score.

Security & privacy

  • Requests are authenticated with your personal token; keys are single-user and rate-limited, with key-sharing detection.
  • Code is processed to produce the verdict and is not used to train models.
  • initialize/tools/list are public (so clients and directories can introspect); every tools/call requires your key.

Pricing

30-day free trial, then USD $30/month (launch offer: 50% off for 3 months). Volume and academic pricing: [email protected].

Guides

About

Built by Verificate Pty Ltd (Sydney, Australia) — an IBM Business Partner. Verificate builds sovereign AI infrastructure: the HELIX inference engine (calibrated confidence scores on every answer), the deterministic Decision Transformer, and this MCP validation server. Product page: https://verificate.ai/mcp · Official registry: ai.verificate/mcp

Licensing

This repo (the stdio bridge, client configs and CI examples) is MIT — use it freely. The Verificate validation engine and hosted gateway it talks to are a commercial service (30-day free trial, then subscription): the 17 protection gates and the frontier-model review run server-side and are not part of this repository.

Glama

[Verificate MCP server score]


🌐 Not an English speaker? Install instructions in हिन्दी · Português · Bahasa Indonesia · Español · 中文 · Tiếng Việt → INSTALL.md

來源:README.md,提交 62880eb

工具

5

validate_artifact

Gate a deployable artifact against the Verificate production doctrine

Deterministic production-readiness gate for AI-built systems. Verifies the invariants that stop a system silently shipping broken: every critical component is PRESENT and LOADS, the import closure resolves (nothing assumed 'already on the box'), all runtime dependencies are declared, and health is a REAL fail-closed check. Returns approve/reject with a fix plan and ISO 27001 / ISO 5055 control evidence. Facts are gathered by the Verificate collector in your CI; the gate is the authority. Non-bypassable, fails closed. This is the control-plane sibling of validate_ai_output — code quality is one invariant; this gates the whole deployable.

輸入參數artifact必填

validate_ai_output

Gate AI-written output (code or documents)

The merge gate for ANY AI-written output — code, documentation, reports, emails, configs: returns a binary approve/reject verdict with veto power — e.g. it rejects code calling the nonexistent stripe.Inventory API, an N+1 loop with the latency arithmetic to prove it, or a doc claiming success with no evidence. Deterministic checks (mock/placeholder veto, reward-gamed tests, standard-library calls that do not exist, secrets written to logs) run first and cannot be overridden; a Claude Haiku 5.5 review (ISO/IEC 25010, ISO/IEC 5055) then verifies third-party API calls and scores quality, accuracy, reliability and tech debt; its high/critical security and API findings block. In a benchmark, a frontier model reviewing alone caught reward-gaming and hallucinated APIs 0/6 times in a natural review workflow; this gate checks for both on every call. Read-only: nothing is executed. Call it on every AI-generated deliverable before accepting it; use validate_plan for plans, analyze_code for an advisory report without a verdict.

輸入參數contextai_output必填validation_typeprevious_receipt_idexpected_input_sha256

validate_plan

Gate an implementation plan

The gate for PLANS, designs and specs — run BEFORE any code is written, the cheapest place to catch a bad design. Returns the same binary verdict shape as validate_ai_output, with findings on completeness, feasibility, performance and scalability implications, security risks and missing considerations (e.g. it rejects a plan that polls an API every 100ms per client, with the request-volume math). Read-only: nothing is executed or stored beyond the verdict. Use validate_ai_output for the code that follows.

輸入參數plan必填contextprevious_receipt_idexpected_input_sha256

analyze_code

Advisory code deep-dive

Advisory deep-dive on existing code — scores and findings, deliberately NO pass/fail verdict, so it never blocks an agent. Surfaces performance hot paths, scalability cliffs, reliability gaps and tech debt with concrete latency/throughput arithmetic (e.g. 'O(n²) dedup: ~4s at 10k items'). Read-only: the code is analyzed, never executed. Use it to understand a validate_ai_output rejection or review inherited code; use validate_ai_output when you need an accept/reject decision.

輸入參數code必填languageanalysis_type

generate_code

Generate gated code

Generate code and gate it in one step: an LLM writes the implementation, then the same protection engine as validate_ai_output vets it — retrying generation when the gate rejects. If every attempt is vetoed you still receive the last attempt, clearly marked validated:false with the gate findings — rejected code is never presented as clean. Generation runs on our infrastructure; nothing executes in your environment.

輸入參數prompt必填languagemax_tokens

版本歷史

1
  1. v1.8.7Sep 16, 2026

評分

已滿足適用檢查項的 100%

該評分衡量此收錄條目的完整程度,依據註冊中心條目、端點與公開來源計算得出。它不是對伺服器本身的評價,也不表示伺服器安全或目前可用:可連通性是帶日期的檢查結果,評分也不包含安裝量或使用者評價。

  • 近 30 天內可連通必需25 分
  • 已宣告認證方式必需10 分
  • 已列出工具必需15 分
  • 描述必需15 分
  • 圖示10 分
  • 文件15 分
  • 授權條款10 分