
Dunstan
io.github.BargLabsv0.1.6更新於 Oct 9, 2026
Checks a coding agent's handback against the pull request's GitHub record. No model decides.
概覽
以確定性、不依賴模型的檢查,將編碼代理的拉取請求交付聲明與 GitHub 自身紀錄相互核對。
- 功能
- Dunstan 讀取交付聲明區塊(變更的檔案、執行的測試、關閉的參照、頭部提交、合併時間),並逐項與儲存庫的 GitHub 紀錄核對:拉取請求狀態、變更的檔案、提交、CI 執行與被參照的議題。它回傳帶有 pass、fail 或 unverifiable 結論的紀錄,該紀錄可離線重跑並得到相同結果。它提供兩個 MCP 工具:dunstan_check_handback 與 dunstan_suggest_declarations,後者列出聲明區塊未涵蓋的正文聲明。
- 適用情境
- 當代理回報某個拉取請求已完成,而你想依據真實儲存庫紀錄核實該報告、而非直接採信時使用。它適合希望在接受交付前取得證據的團隊,也可作為必要檢查接入分支保護。
- 執行需求
- 透過 stdio 在本機執行,通常使用 npx 與 dunstan npm 套件。私有儲存庫以及解析關閉參照需要可選的細粒度唯讀 GitHub 權杖(GITHUB_TOKEN);沒有它時,公開儲存庫以匿名方式讀取。需要存取 GitHub API 的網路連線。
安裝
在 SourceWeft 中
- 開啟 儀表板中的 Dunstan,將其新增到工作區。
- 為需要使用其工具的對話啟用該服務。
Desktop only,透過 STDIO。 STDIO 服務會啟動本機處理程序,因此需要 SourceWeft 桌面主機。
其他 MCP 客戶端
參照 儲存庫 中的啟動說明。
README
Dunstan
Dunstan holds a coding agent's completion report to the record.
An agent finishes and writes a handback: files changed, tests run, references closed, head commit, merged at. Dunstan reads a declared block in that handback and checks each claim against the repository's own record (pull request state, changed files, commits, CI runs) with deterministic checks. It writes a record anyone can re-run on their own machine and get the same verdict.
- No model decides pass or fail.
- Fail closed: a claim the record cannot answer is
unverifiable, never a pass by absence. - Evidence, not a gate: Dunstan returns a record; your branch protection decides what blocks.
The claim format, the block an agent declares and the record Dunstan writes, is an open
specification: spec/claim-format.md, with JSON Schemas in spec/schema/
and examples in spec/examples/.
Use with Claude
Dunstan ships as a Claude Code plugin: two MCP tools and a skill that has Claude declare, check and
report a pull request's handback before it says done (plugins/dunstan/).
Install. In Claude Code:
The plugin runs the MCP server with npx -y [email protected] mcp, the dunstan npm package at that
exact version: one self-contained file, no dependencies.
The token. When you enable the plugin, Claude Code asks for an optional GitHub token and keeps it
in your system's secure credential store. Use a fine-grained personal access token with read-only
permissions, limited to the repositories you check, with an expiry; the permissions are in
docs/mcp.md. Leave it empty to read public repositories
anonymously. GitHub's GraphQL API refuses anonymous calls, so without a token a closes reference is
unverifiable, never fail. The plugin never reads a token from your environment.
What it reads, and from where. The server runs on your machine and calls GitHub's API directly from it: the pull request, its changed files, commits, check runs, workflow runs and test artifacts, deployments, and the issues the block references. Every request is a read. Nothing is written to GitHub or to the repository, and nothing is sent to Barg Labs.
Try it. Three prompts on a public Barg Labs pull request:
Use Dunstan to check this handback for BargLabs/cejel#408: head commit 35d6201d00cf926f9af10df61bfec05b6624ee12, files changed .github/workflows/verify-published-windows-binary.yml and scripts/validate-distribution-metadata.mjs, merged at 2026-10-04T13:30:48Z.Every claim holds, so the verdict ispass.Before I report BargLabs/cejel#408 as done, use Dunstan to list the claims in this report that my handback block does not declare:followed by the report and itsdunstan-handbackblock. Dunstan lists each prose claim the block leaves out, such as a test count or acloses, with the field that would declare it. It is never a verdict.Use Dunstan to check whether BargLabs/cejel#408 closes #407, with head commit 35d6201d00cf926f9af10df61bfec05b6624ee12 and the same two files.Without a token theclosesrow isunverifiable(source_unreadable:closing_references): the record could not settle it, which is not the same as false. With a token it ispass.
Support. GitHub issues or [email protected]. Privacy and terms.
The checker
Exit codes: 0 pass, 1 fail, 2 unverifiable, 3 usage or internal error (verify: 0 verified, 1 not).
--sign-key <path> --signer <principal> writes the record as its JCS bytes with a detached SSH
signature; verify --sig <file> --allowed-signers <file> checks it.
dist/dunstan.mjs mcp serves the same checker as an MCP tool, dunstan_check_handback, which an
agent calls with its block before it says done, beside dunstan_suggest_declarations (below):
docs/mcp.md.
checker.digest in a record is the SHA-256 of dist/dunstan.mjs, the single-file bundle that ran:
the checker code, its dependencies and both schemas from spec/schema/, inlined at build time.
Declare before done
Checking a declared claim is exact. Finding the claims in prose is where readers fail: a hosted model judge clears far fewer false reports once it is handed the right paragraph, and Dunstan's own extractor missed the planted false claims it was tested on. Both fail at the reading, not at the checking. The agent that wrote the report is its best reader, and it is still there before handback. So Dunstan makes the block nearly free to write, then asks the author about the prose the block does not cover:
template fills headCommit and filesChanged (HEAD against its merge base with the remote's
default branch, or --base), and tests only from a JUnit file and the CI record named with it. It
never fills references or mergedAt, and when git cannot answer it prints no block. suggest
runs the advisory extractor over the prose outside the fence and lists each claim it proposes that
the block does not declare, to declare or reword. It is never a verdict, writes nothing to a record
and always exits 0; the MCP server offers it as dunstan_suggest_declarations. The loop, an
instruction block to copy into AGENTS.md or CLAUDE.md, and example output:
docs/agents.md.
The GitHub Action
One step in a workflow, one required check in branch protection:
It writes a dunstan check run on the head commit whose summary is the claims table, the record as
the artifact dunstan-record, and the same table in the job summary. Only pass concludes
success; fail, unverifiable (unless you set unverifiable-conclusion: neutral) and any error
conclude failure. It never comments, labels, reviews or merges. Setup, the branch-protection setting
and what each conclusion means: docs/action.md.
The hosted tier
Optional, beside the local tools, which never use it. POST /v0.1/check with a report or block and
a pull request; Barg Labs' read-only GitHub App reads that pull request's metadata (never file
contents); the same checker returns a record signed with SSHSIG, which dunstan verify re-runs
offline for the same verdict. Records are kept 90 days by default, report text never. What is read
and kept, the Contents: read caveat and the API: docs/hosted.md. The Worker is in
hosted/; provisioning and deploys are the operator's
(docs/runbooks/hosted-provisioning.md).
Retrieval for reader claims (DRAFT)
For a prose report, a reader turns the text into typed claims, and Dunstan has to find which
record items each claim is about. src/retrieval/ does that without a model: exact identifiers
first, then BM25, with a stated floor. Retrieval only proposes candidates. The check decides from
the candidates the record keeps, so dunstan verify reproduces the verdict without retrieving
again. dunstan-eval retrieval measures recall at k = 5. The record format is DRAFT 0.2.0 and is
not yet ruled. Details: docs/retrieval.md.
Advisories from prose (DRAFT)
dunstan check --advisory, or advisory: true in the Action, also reads the report's prose. The
extractor in src/advisory/ binds each path, #N, SHA, count or timestamp to a clause with an
asserting verb, using a written grammar and no model, and drops every token it cannot bind. It
compares what remains with the evidence using the gate's own checks. Each result is recorded as an
advisory: agrees, differs:<reason> or unanswered:<reason>, or agrees_by_name for a file
named only by its name or a partial path. Advisories never change the verdict
and are never fail. The record carries the measured figures beside them, each only for the exact
extractor and comparison it was measured on, or "unmeasured" otherwise ("Measured figures",
below). Details: docs/advisory.md.
A differs note is shown as "possible disagreement, unverified", never as an accusation. A
decision rule preregistered before the measurement said a differs note would be labelled this way
if its measured accuracy fell below 0.50. The rule fired. The CLI, the
Action's summaries and the MCP tool's text use the new wording, followed by what the record shows,
and print one fixed line beside the advisories. With the published figures it reads: "Advisories
never affect the verdict. Extraction precision 0.80 (24/30, 95% CI 0.63–0.90). A possible
disagreement is unverified: on 170 of our own agent PRs, 0 of 20 marked a false claim, and of the 44
advisories the record could check there, none was a false claim (0 of 44)." For a later extractor or comparison, not yet
measured, it states no figure. The record still says differs:<reason>
(docs/advisory.md, "How a differs note is shown").
Measured figures
Published 2026-10-05: value, n and method only, never the reports, their clauses or the adjudication labels.
Method: extractor 0.1.1 proposed 149 advisories on 170 of Barg Labs' own merged agent pull requests.
The operator adjudicated a seeded held-out sample of 30 of them for extraction precision, every
differs advisory (a census of 20) for whether it marked a genuinely false claim. For the base rate,
the record could check 44 of the 149 (24 agreed with it, 20 differed) and none was a false claim; the
other 105 could not be compared with the record and were not judged. Each figure is bound to the extractor digest, and the differs
figure and base rate to the comparison version too. Any later extractor or comparison is
"unmeasured" until it is measured anew; it never inherits a figure. The extractor that runs now is
0.1.3. Since 0.1.2 it stops reading statements about another pull request, an undone change, a
baseline, a negated list or a deliberate test failure as claims, and since 0.1.3 it reads a file
list or a merge time after a colon (docs/advisory.md, "Attribution" and
"Lists, merge times and own references"). Extractor 0.1.4's rules did not generalise to held-out
pull requests and were reverted ("Labels, used names and descriptions"). No figure is published
for 0.1.3, so a record it writes says "unmeasured". The comparison that runs is 0.3.0: a file claim
not among the changed files is a possible disagreement only when its path is a file at the head,
and is unanswered when nothing or a directory is there ("Paths that are not at the head"). It is
unmeasured too: the differs figure stays bound to comparison 0.2.0.
The base rate is always shown next to the differs figure: among the 44 advisories the record
could check, none was a false claim (0 of 44), so 0 of 20 means there was little to find, not that
the check failed to find it. The 105 advisories the record could not check were not judged, so a
false claim among them would not have been seen. Wording that
calls a differs note a mismatch is earned only past a preregistered bar measured on a corpus that
contains false claims (decided 2026-10-05). That has not yet happened. Details:
docs/advisory.md, "Measured figures".
Acceptance criteria and their preregistered fixtures: docs/acceptance/preregistration-0.1.md,
fixtures/.
Status: under construction. The claim format specification is a draft under review.
Licence: the checker and tools under AGPL-3.0-only (LICENSE); the claim format specification in
spec/ under Apache-2.0 (spec/LICENSE). Contributions require the CLA (CLA.md).
來源:README.md,提交 a5ae6be
工具
0版本歷史
1- v0.1.6最新Oct 9, 2026


